9/18/2010

I dabbled into witchcraft — I never joined a coven. But I did, I did. . . . I didn’t join a coven, I didn’t join a coven, let’s get this straight. . . I dabbled into witchcraft. I hung around people who were doing these things. I’m not making this stuff up. I know what they told me they do. […]

One of my first dates with a witch was on a satanic altar, and I didn’t know it. I mean, there’s a little blood there and stuff like that. … We went to a movie and then like had a little midnight picnic on a satanic altar.

I also like the bit about how she wouldn’t lie to the Nazis at the front door to save Anne Frank. But lie about which counties she won to defuse a tough question from an interviewer? No problem!

If only someone had warned us that she has this tendency to say nutty things.

[UPDATE 1:16 p.m.: The actual clip shows her refusing to lie to Nazis for generic Jews and not Anne Frank. She says that God would find a way to help her in that situation without lying. Might as well get the facts on the table now since that debate is coming up too.]

I toddled on over to Dan Riehl’s to see what the True Conservative Take on this will be, and so far I don’t see a post. But it’s pretty clear that the reaction will be some combination of the following:

It’s Bill Maher! You’re gonna trust Bill Maher?!

This one gets you only so far because of, you know, the video. But you never omit the ad hominem.

She wasn’t serious. She was just saying something whimsical to fit in with the Bill Maher Crowd.

But . . . she sounds serious. I mean, she’s laughing about it, but ishe doesn’t sound like she’s making it up. (If she were, would that be better??)

She didn’t realize she was dating a witch. See how she says she didn’t know she was having the picnic on the Satanic altar?

But she says she “dabbled in witchcraft.”

Who here hasn’t done something weird as a young person? You’re just bringing this up because you’re a RINO who really wants to see socialism prevail! You jackass!

Trump card played! There is, of course, no answer to that.

What defense am I missing? Over to you, Riehl . . .

P.S. You realize this isn’t the end, right? Maher says he has more. A lot more.

UPDATE: This post has been up maybe 5 minutes and I already see that the last bullet point was pretty much right. The Correct Reaction is: a) a shrug of the shoulders; b) an announcement that it’s absolutely nothing, as every young person listens to heavy metal and therefore dabbles in witchcraft; and c) an unmitigated wall of fury directed at anyone who suggests it could be a political problem.

I didn’t suggest that! Did you see me suggest that? Well, if it looked like I did, I didn’t mean it! [Looks at ground, shuffles feet.]

Those are your talking points. Now go out and say them. Go on. Do it.*

UPDATE x2: This should be obvious, but I’ll say it anyway. Yes, they are going to use this, and yes, I think it will hurt her candidacy.

I would still vote for her. She could still be a witch for all I care, as long as she takes time out from her potion-mixing to vote the way I want her to vote.

What, like the Democrats don’t have flawed candidates that they have to hold their nose and vote for?

UPDATE x3: Commenters make a valid point: Coons dabbled in Marxism. Which ideology has killed more people: Marxism or witchcraft? Which is more dangerous to the country NOW? You guys are pretty smart. [UPDATE 9-19-10: Except that the “bearded Marxist” allegation, which appears valid from the link provided, does not withstand further scrutiny. Don’t take Weigel’s word for it, follow his link to the Politico article, which I refuse to link because of my boycott, and make up your own mind.]

UPDATE x4: Jeff Goldstein claims that I am saying O’Donnell will lose because Tea Partiers will be turned off by this. Of course, that’s not what I’m saying at all — as I thought was perfectly clear from my post. I doubt Tea Partiers will care about this. As I say in the post, I think they will defend her to the nth degree. But Tea Partiers aren’t a majority in Delaware. I think voters in the middle will think it is plain weird, and laugh at her. And not want to vote for her.

For what it’s worth, I not only sent a trackback to Goldstein when I published UPDATE x4, but I also e-mailed him since then, to specifically direct his attention to the fact that the author of this post disagrees with his interpretation. He acknowledged receipt of the e-mail but has not updated his post to reflect my disagreement with the way he portrayed what I wrote. INTENTIONALISM!!!

462 Responses to “Christine O’Donnell in 1999: I Dabbled in Witchcraft”

When I first heard about this I thought it was a practical joke. I read a PowerLine post saying Maher said he had video, and I thought: oh, he just wants to test the Tea Partiers to see how outrageous a thing she could say, and still get support from the True Conservatives.

Even though the video is real, this still tests that principle. I think this kills any chance she had dead. But I know the Riehls and Levins of the world will find some way to brush this off. It will be interesting to watch how they do it.

I put a link to this post on Twitter and I think the final bullet point is going to prevail. I got an instant reply from Jimmie from the Sundries Shack saying it’s perfectly normal, like listening to metal.

So that’s the reaction: a shrug of the shoulders an an announcement that it’s absolutely nothing, together with an unmitigated wall of fury directed at anyone who would suggest otherwise.

does this mean we get to hear oodles and oodles about Jindal’s exorcism adventures if he runs I think it does… that went way past what Christine did Bobby Jindal actually came face to face with the manifestation of Satan on earth and lived to tell the tale

Christine and her friends Willow Xander and Buffy could do a lot to change the tone in Washington I think and you can count on them to stop Satan’s pet Chris Coons from breaching the hellmouth and then everyone can enjoy tasty cupcakes of freedom

Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn, and caldron bubble.
Fillet of a fenny snake,
In the caldron boil and bake;
Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog,
Adder’s fork, and blind-worm’s sting,
Lizard’s leg, and owlet’s wing,—
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.

Can someone explain to me why the concentration on this dingbat? So what if it turns out she’s got a lot of stuff the media can spin/twist/laugh at to make her look bad. They were going to do that to any actual conservative candidate, even one with a spotless record, anyway.

So what’s the point of obsessing about her? You and Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer seem to be taking it personal that an unknown with a lot of baggage beat out the not-so-conservative Republican in Delaware.

Why?

The point has been made quite well already, more of the same really indicates that her candidacy is being taken personally. Or is it that the TEA party (actually an anti-incumbent throw the bums out attitude is probably more responsible for her primary win) movement is threatening the status quo and in someway threatens those who advocate going along to get along Republicanism?

It’s sad that she’s a bit of a ditz and said and done some off beat and potentially stupid things. Okay. Let’s hope for the best and move on. Was a Castle win really so important or necessary?

When the horse appears to be dead and rotten, beating it any further is a waste of time and makes one look foolish and vindictive.

She’s 41 today. That clip is from 1999 – she was 30 at the time. She has said that her entry into public advocacy coincided with her new found Christian faith, so I’m assuming this “dabbling” predated that — how much time do we put in — 5 years?

So, sometime in her mid-20s she was cavorting with witches.

In my mid-20s I was not married, had no children, worked about 60 hours a week, found time to play 5 rounds of golf a week, got pretty well liquored up with my friends and golf buddies on most Sat’s and Sun’s, and went bar hopping just about every Friday night if wasn’t out gambling somewhere.

How much of that would be relevant it I were to run for Senate today after 10 years of marriage, 3 kids, a round or two of golf a YEAR, and maybe 2 beers a WEEK, and haven’t made a bet on a horse or roll of the dice in a dozen years?

Ever read the story of Gideon in the book of Judges? In the story, Gideon assembles an army and God, displeased by how many people he has, forces Gideon to whittle the army down to next to nothing and then forces them to fight without full armaments. Why? Because God did not want the Isrealites to have a chance to say that THEY won the battle, he wanted to make it absolutely cleae that HE was the one who won it.

Now as far as this video goes, it is what it is and, yes, it is problematic for O’Donnell. But here’s the thing: the person who should have brought this up was Mike Castle, and the time he should have brought this up was, oh I don’t know, AT LEAST a week ago.

Now, if you want vindication that O’Donnell may not have been the best choice, the only thing to do is the opposite of what was done in the story of Gideon. Publicly endorse O’Donnell, defend her on the merits as much as you can — even if the best you can do is say that Coons is worse (‘cos he IS). Keep the criticism, to the extent you need to express it, as mild as possible.

For now. Because if you really, really want to show Riel, Levin, et al. that you were right and they were wrong then you have to rob them of the argument that YOU (and others who criticised her) were the reason the Delaware seat was lost, not them for supporting an unelectible gadfly just to spite a RINO. But that ony works if you support O’Donnell to the hilt, or at least as much as you can bring yourself to do. Then bring the long knives (and videos) out after the election.

How much of that would be relevant it I were to run for Senate today after 10 years of marriage, 3 kids, a round or two of golf a YEAR, and maybe 2 beers a WEEK, and haven’t made a bet on a horse or roll of the dice in a dozen years?

Anything is relevant that they can use. Any of that stuff on video that would make a nice campaign commercial?

Meh. I don’t feel like debating this, because it is indeed pointless. What’s done is done.

71% of Delaware Republicans now support O’Donnell after the primary, while Coons picked up 84% of the state’s Democratic voters. Voters not affiliated with either major party prefer O’Donnell by eight points.

She has plenty of room to convince remaining GOPers (e.g., disgruntled Castle voters) to back her. That 71% will increase, especially after Coons’ record as a quasi-Marxist county commissioner comes to light.

And indies already back her by 8. Watch this number increase. She can win this thing. And don’t forget the Tea Party excitement factor.

In my mid-20s I was not married, had no children, worked about 60 hours a week, found time to play 5 rounds of golf a week, got pretty well liquored up with my friends and golf buddies on most Sat’s and Sun’s, and went bar hopping just about every Friday night if wasn’t out gambling somewhere.

Whew! there for a minute I thought she was caught on tape selling a senate seat.

Whew! there for a minute I thought she was caught on tape shaking down a lobbyist for campaign contributions.

Whew! there for a minute I thought she was caught on tape saying she wanted to spread the wealth around.

Comment by elissa — 9/18/2010 @ 1:14 pm

Not yet anyway. So far she has been caught on audio lying about her 2008 race against Joe Biden and no one who loves and adores seems to think that is a problem.

Tell me, if Christine was a homely man in his 50s and he got caught not paying his mortgage, not paying his taxes, not paying his help, and trying to make millions of a law suit on grounds of mental anguish over being demoted..do you really think that people would feel sorry for him or make excuses for him..and if that guy in his 50s was considered a squish or a RINO do you think conservatives would over look any of this?

This is what happens when you do not vet people. It is not just this one thing, it is this one thing on top of the other things..and the fact that she has canceled her Sunday morning show appearances kind of makes me wonder what else might be out there.

There was a very flawed Republican in Deleware who actually could have beat that bearded Marxist without a lot of trouble, but he was not good enough for some folks and they replaced with a young woman that everyone knew was a long shot at best. So apparently getting rid of the bearded Marxist ceased being a priority some time ago. We are all about vanquishing the ruling class now.

Full disclosure: I worked with a Wikkan (is that the right spelling?) for about two years.
Nice girl. Went over to her house on movie nights.
She introduced me to the concept of internet chat.
I’d actually never seen it before.
I attended her wedding in Reno. Mostly for a night of gambling but the wedding was a nice excuse for the trip.

I don’t believe in witchcraft, but I know people who do, and I don’t hold it against them.

Now I must say this constant barrage against a fellow Republican over trivial matters, fueled by an injured ego, descending into Charles Johnson territory, is unseemly.

You are correct, but that’s not my point. My point is that if you don’t post this you can’t be ACCUSED of helping Chris Coons see this.

And let me add one other point, I see a difference between criticising her and Levin. Levin is a commentator and is held to a higher standard of truth an a politician, frankly. And minimizing your criticism of her now will strengthen your argument against he who shall not be named later.

Consider John McCain. A lot of Republicans hated him. Some, like Limbaugh, swallowed their pride and pushed hard for him anyway. Others, like Brooks, Powell, and Rantell walked away from the GOP and backed Obama. Who has strengthened their influence in the GOP since then and who hasn’t?

O’Donnell’s advisers did exactly the right thing by convincing her to not go on FTN on Sunday.

Where’s she’s at is like Saturday at the Masters — she cannot win the election in the next two weeks, but she sure could lose it.

Even after all the attacks of the last two weeks from the GOP establishment, and now the Dems, she’s still around the mid to low -40s.

She only needs about 5-7% of the electorate to peel away from Coons and come to her since elections are a zero sum game. How SHE presents HERSELF to them in the next 6 weeks is infinitely more important than 12 year old TV clips Bill Maher can drag out.

Whew! there for a minute I thought she was caught on tape selling a senate seat.

But don’t forget that she’s running in a very blue state that is chock full of idiotic liberals and “centrists”—ie, people who in the context of today’s era actually are closeted liberals as much as anything else.

So who do you think will be getting a million benefits of the doubt? And in order to receive even a second’s worth of serious consideration, who do you think will be having to dot every “I” and cross every “T”?

I’m a fan of yours as well as Mark Levin’s. I think we’re all on the same side. This kind of blog war really does no one any good.

On this O’donnell issue, I agree with Ed Morrissey from Hotair. The strategic vote for the winnable RINO made sense BEFORE the primary. Now that he lost and O’Donnell won, we should (or the voters in Delaware) should get behind her. A virtually unbeatable RINO vs. a long shot with a shaky past who nevertheless might serve the majority of your agenda – it’s a tough choice, but the voters opted for the latter.

I’m a bit amused that the right wing establishment apparently dismisses O’donnell supporters as some ideologically pure “true conservative” refusing to be honest their candidate’s shortcoming. I suspect they do. But they want to WIN, insofar as producing real change, whether it’s limited government, lower taxes, etc. Most Americans voted for Obama despite being wary of his questionable associations. Yes, he was a dud, but people were desperate enough for “change” that they threw their support (by the masses) behind the charismatic reformer.

Without that kind of rock solid coaltion, we’ll never accomplish anything. We were supposed to overlook Castle’s imperfections so we can at least score GOP points in the House. (The tea parties voted for Scott Brown, and not the totally obscure libertarian candidate who also ran in that election) The same kind of logic applies to O’donnell. She’s not an ideal candidate, I know. But voters already elect tax cheats and de facto swingers hoping to get something out of them. She’s a marginally better candidate than castle if things go well.

You are correct, but that’s not my point. My point is that if you don’t post this you can’t be ACCUSED of helping Chris Coons see this.

Sure, and I guarantee you that there are bloggers who feel the way I do but are scared to say anything.

And I think plenty agree with me re Levin but are scared to say anything.

I don’t live my life going around being scared to say what I believe because of what some chuckleheads might say about me. I’ve been around the block enough times that I pretty much don’t worry about that.

So please don’t ask me to refrain from saying what I believe so that I won’t be criticized or blamed.

I say what I think, period. Sometimes I get it wrong and sometimes I get it right, but at least I am saying what I think.

[I tried to get away with saying “Sometimes I get it right and sometimes I get it right” but JD called me on it. — P]

This made me laugh. Out loud. Literally. I have done some krazy stuff in my life, some seriously krazy stuff, and I never ate a meal on a satanic altar with blood nearby. WTF?! This makes me more likely to vote for her, or it would, if I lived in Delaware, but I don’t, and don’t want to, so I can’t.

I’m a fan of yours as well as Mark Levin’s. I think we’re all on the same side. This kind of blog war really does no one any good.

Could you confine comments about that to the appropriate thread? There, I could explain to you why I don’t see it as a “blog war” but rather as me trying to correct someone on the facts, and getting derision and further falsehoods in response.

Others, like Brooks, Powell, and Rantell walked away from the GOP and backed Obama.

Those people in 2008 gave away just how squishy and sloppy their ideology really was and is. They have absolutely no excuses because the ultra-leftist background of Obama was widely known and greatly disseminated. Even more so since we do live in the age of the Internet.

Of course, I always sensed that Colin Powell was philosophically ambivalent—since the guy must have tons of family members (if not friends too) who are “progressives.” And in light of Al Rantel being a self-identified gay, and knowing the politics that dominate that community, need I say any more?

“My point is that if you don’t post this you can’t be ACCUSED of helping Chris Coons see this.”

Sean P – Just ignore the ThinkProgress stamp on the video.

My point is I would like to understand the propaganda that is being used against our candidates. I would rather not visit a sewer like ThinkProgress to view it. The reality is this crap is out there. Pretending it is not does not make it go away.

Let’s talk about Coons.
Did you know for instance that in the service of a developer, in his capacity as New Castle County Executive he issued targeted harassment citations against property owners that wouldn’t sell their homes?Here’s an example;

One might think that at $3751 fine would be enough even for Coons. After all, we aren’t challenging the County any more. But no, they are after us again. This time, Coon’s people accuse us of not having a proper permit for repairing our roof. So, they bring at least TEN separate charges for the same alleged offense. They allege one per month for at least ten months. (It’s hard to tell as the documents are so confusing and innacurate.) Read the charges here.

The county ordinance apparently allows bringing a separate charge every day. So the county could charge a person 365 times for having a cracked windowpane and then deliver these charges all at once, without prior notice, and demand a fine for each “violation.” A minimum fine of $100 is prescribed for each “violation” and ”
the court shall not suspend the sentence of any person …” Welcome to Delaware!

Abuse of code enforcement power has often been used to harass people. Since, obviously, every property has some technical code violation, anyone could be harassed. While the evil of Coons in abusing these laws is obvious, it is also obvious that the Delaware General Assembly has itself done a great evil by passing such laws for the County, and by failing to maintain the integrity of Delaware’s courts.

What it comes down to is; you choose whether to vote for someone who has lived life, won some, lost some, and has chosen to continue to try to walk the right path,…or vote for the darkness of progressive policies that are gradually rising all around us to constrain and rule us. You only have one vote. Choose wisely.

If you truly believe that the “ruling class” has your best interests in their hearts, then as old age approaches and you are slowly pulled into the health care system that has been created to care for you and you push and push on the button to call the night nurse and no one comes, try to stay warm with the thought that this is what you voted for.

Powerline’s post about this witchcraft stuff is silly, just like this post. Can we please leave the ridiculing of O’Donnell to the Democrats and the National Enquirer and Bill Maher?

She’s definitely goofy in this Youtube clip, but big deal! In 1979, I went and sang religious songs with the Moonies for the hell of it (and for a free lunch which was very tasty, a tuna sandwich with sprout as I recall). So I dabbled with a cult for a few hours. Big deal!

I also like the bit about how she wouldn’t lie to the Nazis at the front door to save Anne Frank.

Sheesh. And I now recall seeing her on TV several years ago. She occasionally was the token conservative on Bill Maher’s show on ABC.

Based on the things that have come out about her recently, the comment she made about not lying to Hitler must be a sign of an oddly guilty conscience. Or a variation of “methinks she doth protest too much.”

However, since the Democrat Party is loaded down with flakes and frauds (Hi, Hillary! Hi, Barack! Hi, Slow-Joe!, etc, etc), it would be tactically naive and wussy-fied to say that therefore isn’t allowable in the Republican Party. But, again, most of the voters in Delaware who will be determining O’Donnell’s fate are going to be either of the left or squishy independents and Republicans.

Step 2: Gibbs is going to chortle about this in a briefing in a particularly unseemly manner, which could turn this cringeworthy revelation into a win, I’d say, and could add crucial numbers to the stampede predicted at #58 by shipwreckedcrew:

These kinds of attacks by the likes of Bill Maher are exactly the kinds that will DRIVE voters sympathetic to O’Donnell’s policy positions to the polls in a sense of righteous indignation.

I can smell his type from a mile away. They’re similar to the Eric Moran’s of the world—and his ambulance chasers:

Los Angeles Times, 9-18-10:

It didn’t take long to figure out why a man in a wheelchair had been snapping photographs of the aisles, counters, shelves and bathrooms inside eateries and watering holes in a fashionable eastern Long Beach enclave.

On June 30, Powell’s Sweet Shoppe; Open Sesame, a Lebanese restaurant; and Panama Joe’s Grill & Cantina were served with lawsuits on behalf of Eric Moran alleging that they were in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act. The violations, each of which could cost a minimum $4,000 in damages, ranged from lacking a restroom grab bar to a restaurant chair out in an aisle.

About a week later, each received an identical letter from Moran’s Los Angeles attorneys, Miguel Custodio Jr. and Vineet Dubey, seeking an out-of-court settlement of $9,000. “We have photographic evidence of these violations,” the letter said. “We will prevail if this case goes to trial.”

Moran has filed at least 27 such lawsuits since June. Hundreds more have been filed by a relatively small number of attorneys throughout California

.

^ I bet a million bucks that Moran, Custodio and Dubey are dyed-in-the-wool Democrats/liberals.

Well at least no one can ever accuse bloggers and personalities with right/libertarian proclivities of being part of a journolist type coven who plot and agree ahead of time on a common theme and meme.

I heard Christine’s speech last night. She did great! She is going to win in November. I am sick of the Democratic Party, the RINOs and the liberal news media are making this stuff up about her. You can’t make this stuff up. It is time for the Rinos to go. The Rinos are the Liberal Democrats. The conservatives belong to the Republican Party. Thank for the Tea Party!

94, Patterico can’t let it go. You see, the “I told you so,” aspect of this is just to darn important for him. Because, Obambacare, all the spending, bailouts, taking over private companies, cap and trade, ect. are not important. Even the fact that Castle had no interest in trying to do away with any of those things, is not important. What is important, is that O’Donnell said that she “dabbled in witchcraft.” Holly cow, batten down the hatches, the US is going to hell in a handbasket because O’Donnell said she “dabbled in witchcrat.” But ultimately what is most important is for Patterico to be able to say to Riehl, “see told you so!”

You know what O’Donnell needs to do? Get in front of this, and laugh at it.

Find some photographs of currently serious people from twenty years before. Leisure suits. Bell bottom pants.

And she should wear a wizard’s hat when she does it. Kind of “Hey, when I was in my twenties I did some wacky things to seem cool. But I never thought that capitalism was bad, based on a trip to Kenya. Nor do I make a hero out of Che. But if you want some Love Potion #9 instead of socialism, vote for me.”

As between the witchcraft video and the Nazis video, the latter is more problematic. But I’d be interested in seeing more of the latter video to see if she clarified later on.

If she refused to lie about Jews in the attic, and instead mowed down a platoon of Nazis with her machine gun, maybe that’s not so bad. Remember: Anne Frank and company were eventually found by the Nazis, despite the good people who lied about their presence

71% of Delaware Republicans now support O’Donnell after the primary, while Coons picked up 84% of the state’s Democratic voters. Voters not affiliated with either major party prefer O’Donnell by eight points.

She has plenty of room to convince remaining GOPers (e.g., disgruntled Castle voters) to back her. That 71% will increase, especially after Coons’ record as a quasi-Marxist county commissioner comes to light.

And indies already back her by 8. Watch this number increase. She can win this thing. And don’t forget the Tea Party excitement factor.

She’ll win or lose.

No more sideshows… FOCUS!!!

Comment by ColonelHaiku — 9/18/2010 @ 1:24 pm

I would not vote for a guy like Coons if you put a gun to my head, but Delaware is full of people who probably are not like me. Right now, before this news came out, O’Donnel was about 11 behind Coons. It might be that 71% of Republicans support her, but there are not a lot of Republicans in Delaware to begin with. And there are a lot of Democrats. I am not saying it can not be done, but the point is that stuff like this will just keep coming out now.

However, since the Democrat Party is loaded down with flakes and frauds (Hi, Hillary! Hi, Barack! Hi, Slow-Joe!, etc, etc), it would be tactically naive and wussy-fied to say that therefore isn’t allowable in the Republican Party. But, again, most of the voters in Delaware who will be determining O’Donnell’s fate are going to be either of the left or squishy independents and Republicans.

Comment by Mark — 9/18/2010 @ 2:25 pm

I think part of the problem with conservatives in situations like this, is that Democrats do not really spend much time talking about their morality. For instance, Barney Frank does not pretend that he is straight. If he did revelations that his boyfriend ran a brothel out of his apartment would have done some damage. They have no grace to fall from.

With all the things people freely say and “share” these days on You Tube and Facebook and camera phones, there may be no one safe enough to run for office or occupy a corporate corner office in the near future.

Powerline’s post about this witchcraft stuff is silly, just like this post. Can we please leave the ridiculing of O’Donnell to the Democrats and the National Enquirer and Bill Maher?

She’s definitely goofy in this Youtube clip, but big deal! In 1979, I went and sang religious songs with the Moonies for the hell of it (and for a free lunch which was very tasty, a tuna sandwich with sprout as I recall). So I dabbled with a cult for a few hours. Big deal!

Comment by Andrew — 9/18/2010 @ 2:23 pm

And when I was young I got into the whole hippie back to the land nonsense, but then again I am not running for the US Senate. And what are people on the right supposed to do, pretend that if we don’t talk about this stuff those neophyte amateurs at the DNC will never figure it out by themselves.

Shhh mums the word.

The truth is O’Donnell should have been vetted more carefully. If she had been she might have been able to defuse some of this stuff. Instead, her supporters refused to listen to criticism and deal with reality and now here we are hoping that she can actually cross the finish line. Maybe she can.

#100, Also, too bad Elizabeth McGovern was a screaming moonbat of the highest order. Seriously, she was peddling that “secret team” Iran Contra conspiracy well into the 1990s, after even folks like Michael Moore and Tom Tomorrow had moved on.

With all the things people freely say and “share” these days on You Tube and Facebook and camera phones, there may be no one safe enough to run for office or occupy a corporate corner office in the near future.

Comment by elissa — 9/18/2010 @ 3:20 pm

There is definitely truth in that. I am amazed at what some people put on facebook. Employers do look at that stuff.

O’Donnell should turn this around and use it to her benefit. Smarten up, get some wicked humor and ignore the stupid stuff, but she certainly needs to come out straight up and forthrightly address the serious red flags, like the lies she’s apparently been caught in. Clean it up and set the record straight. Everyone she asks for a vote from deserves that at the least.

Oh and she could start by adopting ‘Witchy Woman’ as her campaign song.

Raven hair and ruby lips
sparks fly from her finger tips
Echoed voices in the night
she’s a restless spirit relentless candidate on an endless flight
wooo hooo witchy woman, see how
high she flies
woo hoo witchy woman she got
the moon Senate seat in her eye

If the Tea Party is going to be the next political party or movement or whatever it is they are, they need to learn how to vet from professionals, and they need to learn it fast. I think there might be a naivete and almost innocent optimism clouding a necessary cynicism and shrewdness when looking at candidate wanna-bes.

94, Patterico can’t let it go. You see, the “I told you so,” aspect of this is just to darn important for him. Because, Obambacare, all the spending, bailouts, taking over private companies, cap and trade, ect. are not important. Even the fact that Castle had no interest in trying to do away with any of those things, is not important. What is important, is that O’Donnell said that she “dabbled in witchcraft.” Holly cow, batten down the hatches, the US is going to hell in a handbasket because O’Donnell said she “dabbled in witchcrat.” But ultimately what is most important is for Patterico to be able to say to Riehl, “see told you so!”

Yes, that is a very accurate characterization of my views, and not at all misinformed strawman bullshit. My, no!

Of course, someone will “use it”, although I don’t know how you would build someone’s comments about high school into an effective political advertisement.

And you know, any parent who has kids in school know will associate with a woman who has been outspoken about what she went through in high school.

It’s not like someone did journalism and had to dig this up — she freely admits it, on a national show (sure, one with a small audience). But she’s also addressed other aspects of her childhood, she’s spoken about her youthful indiscrations.

It wasn’t illegal to have sex with people playing around with witchcraft, after all.

I hope someone who is associated with Coons tries to make a big deal out of this, because voters in general really don’t like when you attack opponents for legal activities they did in HIGH SCHOOL, even if they are funny or considered immoral.

Heck, Coons admitted to his liberal voting block that he was a CONSERVATIVE in High School. Surely to those voters, being a conservative is much worse than being a witch.

But I don’t think you are a RINO for bringing it up, or stupid for being worried about it. I just happened to think that it’s not nearly the big deal some are making it to be, and I think you and Paul over at Powerline are just making matters muddied for those of us who are defending you against attacks by Levin.

THere are years I’d think this was a big deal because it would turn off the value voters. Do you really think any conservatives are going to NOT vote for a born-again rehabilitated conservative because of what they did in high school before their conversion? This isn’t like Bush’s DUI arrest.

BTW, her discussion about lying to Nazis shows an interesting thoughtfulness. She’s talking to an avowed atheist who mocks all religious belief. He’s looking for a gotcha moment, and thinks the “you say Lying is a sin, but wouldn’t you lie to say a jew from a nazi”?

THe normal response is to hem and haw and say that you’d lie but it is OK, and then try to explain how sometimes lying isn’t a sin.

She took a much more thoughtful approach — lying is a sin, so she believes that you shouldn’t lie, that sinning isn’t the way to serve God, and that if you give in to God’s will, God will provide a way to work his will in the situation.

It is very telling that apparently Maher didn’t think that suited his purposes enough to use it in his broadcast. Her answer didn’t apparently play to his point of view. Would I lie to save someone? That is a hard one — I’ve always tried to find ways NOT to lie, and believe lying is a sin.

BTW, is it interesting to you that Maher saved all of his raw footage for 11 years, and is willing to use it for his political advantage? Maybe we shouldn’t be rewarding him. And maybe good people should remember this and never show up on his show — of course I already think nobody should go on, or watch, his show — this just shows us one more selfish reason for conservatives and everybody else to avoid his show.

UPDATE x4: Jeff Goldstein claims that I am saying O’Donnell will lose because Tea Partiers will be turned off by this. Of course, that’s not what I’m saying at all — as I thought was perfectly clear from my post. I doubt Tea Partiers will care about this. As I say in the post, I think they will defend her to the nth degree. But Tea Partiers aren’t a majority in Delaware. I think voters in the middle will think it is plain weird, and laugh at her. And not want to vote for her.

Shoulda woulda coulda. Those three words can be both poisonous and unhealthy.

Many commenters (including me) on this site last week were firmly on the side of pragmatism over purity in the Delaware primary. And, you are absolutely correct–all candidates “should” be vetted. But they often aren’t. Take the current occupant of the White House as example #1.

Anyway, what shoulda or coulda been done regarding O’Donnell is now moot. The voters of Del. have already voted in the primary and have made her their Republican choice. So it’s all over now until November when the citizens of Delaware vote again. I just don’t see what anyone gains or how America gains by keeping up the “Castle shoulda won and woulda been a better candidate” mantra. We need to fixate on the bearded Marxist now.

I think, Patterico, it depends on how O’Donnell handles it. Remember Reagan’s “There you go again…”?

If she makes fun of her hair and clothes in the video clips (“those were the days, huh?”), pointing out that we all looked different then—sly smile, adding “even Mr. Maher”—and that everyone says things that they may or may not have meant after they grew up.

For example, she might say, I was hanging out with some odd people in my twenties, sure. But I never claimed that I learned about a better way to govern America from Marxists in Kenya.

She could then challenge her opponent to clarify his earlier remarks, but also point out that no one is threatening to release more “embarrassing clips from twenty years ago if he doesn’t go on a low rated cable show. So Mr. Coon doesn’t have to defend his earlier statements, or be thought strange.”

Then she could say, hey, it comes with the territory. Some candidates are really examined carefully. Some are not. All she can do, she should finish, is tell voters what she values, and how she will vote. The rest is up to them.

After all, she can finish, “I don’t have a magic wand to make problems go away. But I could sure use a little magic to become your Senator.”

I’m more concerned about the fact that she was willing to appear on that douchebag’s show, than anything she may have said while there. Further, I’m not ready to believe any of this is fact yet. Maher is an outright liar, and Patterico is sometimes unreliable (see Levin).

BTW, is it interesting to you that Maher saved all of his raw footage for 11 years

In my case, that made me recall exactly who O’Donnell was, not realizing until today she was the same person I saw on Maher’s show several years ago. I liked her, which, of course, was helped by the fact she often was the lone non-liberal voice on the panel.

I think the vetting standard is currently being set by the fellow residing at 1600 PA Ave – and it is not a very high bar to cross (slithering under it might be another problem though).
And, since that is the established standard, if the Dems complain, just offer them a nice, steaming cup of STFU!

This little tidbit ought to put her in solid with the fundamentalist Christian types.

Hypothetical campaign speech to be delivered in Delaware’s bible belt…

“By the way, folks, did I ever tell you about the time I went to a movie with a follower of Satan and then like had a little midnight picnic on a satanic altar? It’s o.k. though, because we didn’t get nekkid and do the dirty deed, and I didn’t go home and fondle my genitals afterwards. I’m a good Christian. Trust me.”

I’m more concerned about the fact that she was willing to appear on that douchebag’s show, than anything she may have said while there. Further, I’m not ready to believe any of this is fact yet. Maher is an outright liar, and Patterico is sometimes unreliable (see Levin).

The video is doctored, then?

This is bullet point #1 listed above, but most people are smart enough to take a different approach. Because, you know. There’s a VIDEO.

One could also point to a number of Dem’s who are already elected, and can’t seem to stay on the right side of things: Waters, Holmes, Rangel. Jeez, they even elected a former judge who was convicted and jailed! No room for them to even whisper.

…and a great wail arose across the land,
and the rending of garments proceeded forthewith,
and the seas boiled, and the skies turned blood-red….

Well, you get the idea.
Let’s not try to read too much into this.
In today’s anti-establishment mood, would there be anything more anti-establishment than a witch?
Perhaps she can put a hex on Chuck Schumer? Or turn him into a frog (though toad would be a better metaphore)?

Did ANYONE here read my post as an assertion that TEA PARTY people were going to turn their back on her?

Wasn’t I crystal clear that the Tea Partiers were going to back her so strongly that they would brook no dissent from those concerned about how this revelation would play with average voters at the polls?

Hence the jokes about how we all had to toe the line, mouth the talking points, etc.

I think a great many Indies will laugh with her.
They certainly don’t want the bitter pill that the Marxist will try to stuff down their throats,
since they’re having great difficulty swallowing the Pelosi/Reid/Obama pill that is Marxist-lite.

So far she has handled questions about her in a defensive and dishonest manner. She can’t really blame this one on Mike Castle or Coons. If she laughs at it she may be OK; if she takes the “fuck Bill Maher” attitude I think she’s sunk.

As I see it the important thing isn’t whether or not our candidates are engaging in some lighthearted satanic rituals or picnicking on blood-stained altars, the important thing is whether or not we can save a couple of hundred bucks every year by slashing taxes.

Putting on my lawyer hat, didn’t Maher make an offer in that video? Didn’t he offer to keep more old clips off the air if O’Donnell visits the show again? So, if she accepts the offer and performs according to the oral contract, could she sue him if he breaches? After all, it would cost her a lot of time and effort to address and compensate for every clip he releases. That’s offer and acceptance, baby.

Yes! After tolerating, and rewarding, the constant gaffes of Sloe-Joe, it would be a bit hypocritical for the average DE voter to rag on what O’Donnell has said, and especially so for the Political Class in media.

ffs. who gives a crap? she could be the Abominable Snowwoman every night after midnight and all day on alternate mondays, but if she believes in following the Constitution, especially in the limits on the federal govt., then that’s all that matters.

Andrew – Yes, he did. Christine should not accept the druggie pedophile’s blackmail.

Instead, I think she should make fun of it and let the voters know what else she “dabbled” in as a youth or has to worry about coming out in clips from the show. Head the syphilitic dwarf off at the pass.

I don’t get the point here, Patterico. You spend an entire article on some bizarre associations she had in her 20s, proactively trying to negate all the obvious points against your sniping, then say you’d vote for her “anyway” (as if this had any real meaning), grumble that you don’t want to argue about the very premise of your article, and then proceed to argue with every person who disagrees with you.

Who are you trying to convince? And of what?

She’s the best candidate now, so either back her or shut up and move on. Anything else is petty.

I’m right with AJsDaddie. But I think you should post the video several more times before Nov 2, just to be sure that as many people as possible know just how UNIMPORTANT this issue is. Especially since you are going to vote for her, anyways, that’ll certainly make up the difference.

She’s the best candidate now, so either back her or shut up and move on. Anything else is petty.

I’m backing her. Can’t you read?

I think what you mean is: “Back her AND shut up” — meaning don’t talk about her flaws.

Look: people are saying: “attack Chris Coons!!!” I don’t know anything about Chris Coons, other than that he’s a Democrat who will vote for the Obama agenda. That’s good enough for me to oppose him.

I know little about Christine O’Donnell personally, and tend to discount arguments made by partisans on both sides, leaving me with direct material like radio interviews and videos like this. The radio interview I have heard made her seem like a liar. This video makes her seem like someone that independent voters will look at and say: hmmm. She seems kinda wacky.

What is the point of the post? This is news. It’s interesting. People want to talk about it. So I post on it, give my opinion, watch it be distorted by other bloggers, and allow people to comment.

That’s the nature of blogs.

I will say to you what I say to others: I speak my mind on things. You want to see me trash Democrats, read my latest post. But don’t expect me to pretend this woman is some ideal candidate. I’ll leave the dissembling to others.

She’s the best candidate now, so either back her or shut up and move on. Anything else is petty.

Don’t worry about Patterico, don’t worry about anyone in this forum. Worry about all the voters in blue-state Delaware.

And don’t assume that if even the tiniest bit of bad news about O’Donnell were kept well hidden by the rightists, that all the liberals and squishes in Delaware still wouldn’t somehow get wind of it.

And don’t assume that if even O’Donnell were as perfect as the Second Coming, that a lot of liberals and squishes in Delaware still wouldn’t snort: “But she’s not nice and sophisticated enough! She’s a meanie and probably a racist, and is inhumane towards the working class. She’s also a tool of big, heartless corporations!! Plus she’s a yeechy Christian fundie—we don’t need those types when America has to reach out to the sad, misunderstood Middle East!!”

So Patterico, you preferred an antigun, pro choice RINO who voted for the stimulus and would have voted for cap and trade to someone who says they will support the constitution? Seems to me O’Donnell did things in her past which outside of youth might be frowned upon, however many done things in their youth which could only be attributed to being young. Is she practicing witchcraft now? Coons on the other hand was a conservative who traveled to Kenya where he converted to Marxism. I heve not read anything about his renouncing that position. O’Donnell is a human who has made human choices. Coons ascribes to a philosophy which is inhuman in nature. His record as a county administrator is the record he runs on. That record indicates he is a tax and spend Dem. Patterico you do not want criticizm of you opinion about O’Donnell yet that very opinion of O’Donnell will be used by the Marxist to gain a seat in the U.S. Senate. I would call your postion being a usful idiot. Fact is had Castle prevailed it would have been difficult to tell by his voting record wheather he was GOP or Democrat.

Leave the dissembling to others??? You’re doing the ultimate dissembling. You’re saying she’s going to lose, then weasel-wording it. “I hope I’m wrong!” Please. It’s the essential half-way remark; if she loses, you say I told you so, if she wins you say you were with her the whole time. Not only are you not coming out against the premise, you’re dissing every argument against it. And then complaining that anybody who disagrees with you is rigid and fanatical!

Nobody said she’s perfect. I think she’s flawed but I think she’s better than Coons. (And if you don’t know anything about Coons, that’s just laziness on your part. There’s more out there on Coons than a 10-year old clip from Bill Maher. Seriously.) But rather than provide more cannon fodder for the Democrats (“see what Patterico said!”), you should be pointing out that the entire premise of this argument is irrelevant. Instead of pre-emptively dissing valid arguments, you ought to be using your pulpit to excoriate the very fact that this is being brought up at all.

Unless you somehow think that playing footsie with a Goth in your 20s somehow disqualifies someone from holding a Senate seat over a decade later. It’s a yes or no – you either think the argument has merit or you don’t. Arguing that someone ELSE might think the argument has merit (but not you, oh no!) is dissembling of the very worst sort.

The local talk show host that follows Rush in my neck of the woods, was playing this game, yesterday,conducting a ‘listener poll’ to see if he had permission to drip some more tidbits about Christine, despite the fact that I’m sure it went the other way, he did it anyways. Now you are taking water from a poisoned cup in Think Progress, and they will use the dissention in the ranks here, as they did with Noonan, David ‘Obama is like the Mountain” Brooks, re the next thread,

Leave the dissembling to others??? You’re doing the ultimate dissembling. You’re saying she’s going to lose, then weasel-wording it. “I hope I’m wrong!” Please. It’s the essential half-way remark; if she loses, you say I told you so, if she wins you say you were with her the whole time.

Since I think she will lose, but want her to win, can I get your advice on an Approved Method for stating for I believe?

Unless you somehow think that playing footsie with a Goth in your 20s somehow disqualifies someone from holding a Senate seat over a decade later. It’s a yes or no – you either think the argument has merit or you don’t.

I answered that question in the post. Want to read it again? I don’t feel like repeating myself who is glossing over my arguments and showing they didn’t read what I said.

Arguing that someone ELSE might think the argument has merit (but not you, oh no!) is dissembling of the very worst sort.

No, it’s the truth. I can pretty much see your mind is made up and I have no chance of having you pay any attention to what I am actually saying and actually think. But for the benefit of others not so closed-minded: I DON’T CARE BUT I THINK OTHERS WILL. That is my belief. You can continue to call it dissembling but that does not make it so.

ian cormac, you and I have a fundamental disagreement about whether it matters where truthful information comes from. If you have a reason to believe the video has been edited somehow, given its provenance, make that argument. Absent such an argument, it strikes me as bad logic, at a minimum, to discount facts because you don’t like the source from whence they came.

you preferred an antigun, pro choice RINO who voted for the stimulus and would have voted for cap and trade to someone who says they will support the constitution?

I don’t mind folks on the right saying that, when push comes to shove, O’Donnell is preferable to Coons. But nothing ticks me off more than when people assume that O’Donnell’s conservative ideology is verifiable and impeccable.

I continue to theorize that a person with a tendency to be dishonest and flaky — as appears to be the case with O’Donnell — probably has some strong left-leaning biases embedded in their brain.

Politico.com, 9-14-10: Christine O’Donnell’s former campaign manager has recorded an Election Day robocall for the Delaware Republican Party meant to shred the tea-party-backed candidate’s conservative credentials as voters head to the polls.

The call features the voice of Kristin Murray, who ran O’Donnell’s 2008 Senate campaign against then-Sen. Joe Biden, and who charges that her old boss “is no conservative.”

“I got into politics because I believe in conservative values and wanted to make a difference. But I was shocked to learn that O’Donnell is no conservative,” says Murray, according to a script obtained by POLITICO.

“This is her third Senate race in five years. As O’Donnell’s manager, I found out she was living on campaign donations — using them for rent and personal expenses, while leaving her workers unpaid and piling up thousands in debt,” she says.

Perhaps the most biting line in the call delivered by Murray: “She wasn’t concerned about conservative causes. O’Donnell just wanted to make a buck.”

…Murray says in the call that O’Donnell’s less-than-noble motives are why she left the campaign, and are the reason “why I won’t trust O’Donnell with my hard-earned tax dollars.”

In an interview, Murray said she had been reluctant to speak out about O’Donnell until she saw her campaign gaining traction and becoming a real threat to win the primary.

“Obviously, I don’t think I would be doing an ad for the state party if they fired me,” she told POLITICO Tuesday afternoon. “And I’m not a big fan of Castle either; I wasn’t going to be, ‘Rah-rah Castle.’ I just wanted people to know it’s more about who is better on taxes. You’re dealing with someone who is a complete fraud.”

Murray said she voluntarily left her position as executive director of the state party to run O’Donnell’s second Senate run in June 2008, after the candidate pleaded with her three different times to sign on. She left the position two months later, after she found out O’Donnell doesn’t have a college degree, had foreclosed on her home and was using the campaign debit card for personal expenses.

“It just amounted to too much,” she said. “The reason she’s running is so she can pay her rent, pay her electricity bill. If it was popular to be really liberal now, maybe she’d do that,” Murray said.

Murray’s call marks the second time a former O’Donnell campaign staffer has come forward in recent days to publicly rebuke the former television commentator’s candidacy.

David Keegan, a former O’Donnell aide, told The New York Times earlier this month that when he found out about O’Donnell’s personal financial problems, he decided he could no longer work for her.

“We are constantly trying to hold her back from spending. She was financially completely irresponsible,” Keegan told the Times.

Point 1: If you’ve spent more than 10 minutes thinking about politics over the course of the last week and a half, you’re an outlier. Most people don’t have very well-founded political opinions (i.e., most people are independents). Exciting, crazy, or frightening information is likely to have a heavy effect on their opinions, mostly because it will be repeated to the point that they can’t help but learn it, and because witchcraft is interesting and thus easy to learn.

What the fuck is wrong with everybody? Is it really that big a deal for Patterico to say that he thinks O’Donnell will lose, considering, you know, that he DOES?

And so do I, for that matter, and so do a lot of rational people (I’m sure). This is a purported fiscal conservative who’s been evading her loans. Forget the witch stuff – this lady is sketch as hell, and everybody’s outraged that Patterico and others are refusing to join them in jamming their heads in the sand. Refusing to admit that she’s a terrible candidate isn’t going to change it, and if you can’t deal with honest people pointing that out, then I don’t know what to do for you.

I understand why you’re sympathetic to the victims of dogpiling, Pat: you’re on the receiving end of it right now. And it’s bullshit. Since when did it become heresy to have a negative opinion of a shitty candidate?

“Now you are taking water from a poisoned cup in Think Progress, and they will use the dissention in the ranks here”

ian – Go look at memeorandum. This story and clip are all over the left. Is that a reason for the right to hide it’s collective head in the sand and pretend it doesn’t exist or self-censor itself? That is what the left does when news comes out that they don’t like. They clam up. There is no reason for the right to do that.

AJsDaddie – Can you point to Patterico’s words in the post where he says she is going to lose? Is there something you do not understand about the phrase “I hope I’m wrong!”? Do you see the word “boy” at the end of sentences when it is not there?

I guess we can only hope that most voters are serious enough that they wouldn’t judge a candidate, or any person, by an OUTTAKE VIDEO from a low-rated cable show from the 1990s.

There are many videos of her on YouTube. If you check out MOST of them, you will find a serious, well-reasoned human being, who does not come across as at all crazy, nuts, or weird.

Even in this video, it’s what she is talking about that is a little weird, not how she is talking. She sounds like a person who, when she was in high school, got into things that a good number of high schooler’s get into.

She is describing those things from a post-christian perspective, one that for sure the less-schooled won’t really recognize. Maybe that’s why some people find it weird, while those of us who hear these types of stories regularly find it normal.

Hmm… Now that an interesting thought — is she going to lose because there aren’t enough poeple in Delaware who understand “christian-speak”?

You guys are acting like the Marxist label will somehow magically stick, but the Wicca label somehow magically won’t. I don’t know if Coons is going around trumpeting Marxism – if he is, discount this. But if he isn’t then the question is a pertinent one.

I saw the Maher stuff last night. As I said in the “Levin” post, she is still preferable to a Marxist.

I was overserved oftentimes in my teens and 20s. I was then and still am fond of heavy metal and saw almost any hard rock act of the time you could name. But Satanic cult stuff is kinda out there.

O’Donnell had best be proactive; release all this crap yourself, answer all the questions and explain you were young and silly, while Coons was then and still is a Marxist. It’s may be a one day goofy story if she does that and is forthcoming. If she allows Maher and his ilk to drip, drip, drip this stuff out piecemeal, she is toast.

Christine: I’m not a witch I’m not a witch!
Sir Patterico: But you are dressed as one
Christine: *They* dressed me up like this!
Huffington Post: We didn’t! We didn’t…
Christine: And this isn’t my nose. It’s a false one.
Sir Patterico: [lifts up her false nose] Well?
Wapo: Well, we did do the nose.
Sir Patterico: The nose?
WaPo: And the hat, but she is a witch!
Huffington Post: Yeah! Burn her! Burn her!
Sir Patterico: Did you dress her up like this?
CBS.com: No!
NYTimes, Guardian UK: No!
NYTimes: No!
CBS.com: No!
NYTimes, Guardian UK: No!
CBS.com: Yes!
Guardian UK: Yes!
CBS.com: Yeah a bit.
NYTimes: A bit!
CBS.com, Guardian UK: A bit!
Guardian UK: a bit
CBS.com: But she has got a wart!
Random Person in the crowd: *cough* *cough*

No matter VOR2. Yes, the question should be asked.But some of us, even responsible and eduacted people with decent jobs, didn’t pop out of the womb as fully-formed 40-year old responsible adults. If O’Donnell can explain the silly things she did and how she has since changed, she can still win. It’s not like she wasted an Ivy law degree organizing a community with Alinskyite stupidity that is still a desperate slum.

“In the article, Coons, then 21 years old and about to graduate from Amherst College, chronicled his transformation from a sheltered, conservative-minded college student who had worked for former GOP Delaware Sen. William Roth and had campaigned for Ronald Reagan in 1980 into a cynical young adult who was distrustful of American power and willing to question the American notion of free enterprise.

Coons, the New Castle County executive who is running against GOP Rep. Michael Castle for the state’s open Senate seat, wrote of his political evolution in the May 23, 1985, edition of the Amherst Student.

The source of his conversion, Coons wrote, was a trip to Kenya he took during the spring semester of his junior year—a time away from America, he wrote, that served as a “catalyst” in altering a conservative political outlook that he was growing increasingly uncomfortable with.”

I just saw the text at that link you posted and now I’m feeling pissed off all over again about O’Donnell. Yea, I know it’s a case of crying over spilled milk, but I’m struggling to not get really irritated towards O’Donnell.

If she screws up the anti-Democrat/anti-liberal/anti-Obama momentum now and through November, someone will have to go out and beyottch slap her.

Nationalreview.com:

Castle has consistently led all polls and his voting history suggests he will vote with conservatives 52 percent of the time or so. If Democrat Chris Coons is elected and votes in a pattern similar to Delaware’s other senator, he will vote the conservative position 12 percent of the time…

Over his 17 complete years in the U.S. House of Representatives, Castle has voted the conservative position, as defined by the American Conservative Union, about 52 percent of the time. In 2009, ACU scored Castle at 56. So how did he get that rating from the group last year?

Castle opposed the Lilly Ledbetter pay act, which the ACU described as a “new Pandora’s Box for trial lawyers.” He voted for a January 2009 bill that would prevent the Treasury from spending the $350 billion that remained in the TARP program. He opposed the Obama stimulus. He voted against efforts to water down legislation barring federal funds to ACORN or other organizations that employ people who have been convicted of election-law violations. He voted to eliminate the earmark for the airport near Johnstown, Pa., named after Rep. John Murtha. He voted to cut discretionary government spending in the appropriations for the Departments of Housing and Transportation by 5 percent.

He supported an amendment to the health-care bill that would ban using taxpayer funds to provide abortion services, an interesting vote for a self-described pro-choice Republican. He voted against the health-care bill.

A central point of the O’Donnell folks is that Mike Castle is unacceptable because he doesn’t support the repeal of Obamacare. But that’s only half his stated position. Castle thinks trying to repeal Obamacare while Obama is president is a waste of time, but he’s open to the idea if the GOP can regain control of the White House

^ I have a hunch the story of O’Donnell versus Castle will end up being like one of those movies where the character everyone thought was the “bad guy” actually in the end turns out to have been the good guy all along. And, in turn, the character everyone originally believed was the “good guy” (or “good girl”) ends up being not so good, or was even the “villain” in the piece.

I think it’s freaking hilarious that this story is all over the left and we have a bunch of numbnuts here shrieking that WE MUST NOT TALK ABOUT THIS. I welcome our new ruling class!

Heh. Yep. The irony.

However, O’Donnell needs to get in front of this, stop canceling appearances, and face the big ‘ol mean media. She has to dig deep and fight. One might misread her as afraid or intimidated by the circling vultures. Not good. Time to jump in and mix it up. And better sooner than later.

It’s fine, I hadn’t seen the clip before, Schieffer
probably hasn’t even figured out the intertubes in time, Laura Ingraham was on more than a few times,
in the early days, she’s not running for anything

JD,
You are correct. Recant was not in the article but there seem to be no other statements he has made since his student years in which he talked about the view. I took the part that said he registered as Democrat as the recant moment. Sorry about that. I’ve looked but nothing pops up in google.
And yes I agree that he is a hard core leftie.

The truth is O’Donnell should have been vetted more carefully.
Comment by Terrye — 9/18/2010 @ 3:24 pm

Maybe, just maybe, the Castle campaign should have dug up some of these videos before the primary. Maybe they should have run a better campaign and not made the assumption that since he was the party’s guy and she was a “nothing” the win was going to be a slam dunk.

If I was a resident of Delaware, I’d likely have held my nose and voted for Castle on the electibility thing, but his behavior after losing demonstrated that he felt he was entitled to win. Perhaps he wasn’t properly vetted before being nominated by the party to run. He ran a cr*p campaign and has been in a major snit ever since.

Childish, sore loser, overweaning sense of entitlement – all of those things come to mind when I think of him (and Crist and Murkowski). It seems to me that the “moderate” wing of the GOP needs to grow up a bit.

Her opponent apparently cast the spell Levitate Property Taxes on a regular basis. Sounds like he’s got her beat on the Dark Arts.

Of course I could be wrong but I doubt that she’s going to lose any votes on the dread witchcraft dabbling issue. The right will vote for her anyway; the left won’t and has a soft spot for Wicca to boot; and the center will wonder why Coons is diddling around with these kinds of silly smears while the economy stagnates, taxes rise, and the government grows out of control.

Clinton dabbled in marijuana and who knows what else as a hippie wannabe college student. Obama dabbled in cocaine. Why is this even as bad as that? Sounds like it’s about as disqualifying as having dabbled in palmistry.

Like Christine O’Donnell, I dabbled in the occult in my senior year of high school, and even my first year of college. Like Christine O’Donnell, I became an evangelical Christian in my late twenties. It’s called spreading your wings, experimenting, and then real life begins to slap you across the head and you grow up. Any questions?

Ever notice that Republicans are the only ones that worry about shit like this???

I seem to remember someone that ran for president who studied in Muslem schools as a child, smoked pot in college (and we still don’t know his grades), left law office jobs to go work on the street, force opponents out of election campaigns, lied about financing his elections, lied about writing his books, married a woman who then got a do nothing job while he was a local/state/legislative politician, associated with terrorists…

And, got elected president….

Sorry all, but I would vote for her anyway (and would have the first time) and will support her campaign (with my meager donation) because if Obama can be elected in this country, O’Donnell can be elected in Delaware…

I agree completely. And I’m about to dabble in Face-Palmistry that anyone is even wasting time getting worked up on this.

Dabbled in witchcraft? Does that disqualify everyone who went to the Harry Potter movies or bought the books? Don’t independents dress their kids up as witches for halloween? Don’t thousands of homes have kitchen-witch dolls, a tradition in many parts of America. Anyone ever heard of D&D? You’d think the election was being held in Salem in 1692 the way some people are freaking out over this.

#I predict the Stewart- Colbert rally fill fizzle but will get more publicity than Beck’s rally.

Comment by pk — 9/18/2010 @ 7:58 pm

I predict it will get less publicity, but influence more voters!

I know lots of people here -perhaps most- believe there is a fundamental difference in beliefs between Dems and Repubs. I think you get the indie voters wrong quite often.

I am a hawk on all things military, tend to agree with the GOP more often than the Dems on fiscal matters, and think they both lose me on all social issues. Both parties lose on social issues, and those are very important to me. And the only sports on TV worth watching are Nascar and Surfing.

I think there are lots of people who are of the same mind (although maybe not surfing fanatics, which is a shame). We are not looking at the pundits and the party leadership to show us the way.

And Bill Clinton didn’t inhale. Oh, and Teddy was a great driver. And girls don’t lust after those hunks in The Vampire Diaries. Good gossip but anyone that wouldn’t vote for O’Donnell for these reasons wouldn’t have voted for her. Just a lame excuse because they don’t want to say they’re “moderate” or liberal or a closet Marxist.

If she issued a statement that says she’s been secretly witch hexing Biden for years, causing his mouth to say crazy and inappropriate things, that’d prolly get a laugh from Delawareans and the rest of the world.

I thought I read somewhere Castle voted for the stimulus. I will now have to check his voting record. He is pro gun control and pro choice. He has said he supports cap and trade. Hot Air takes another look at this issue. Where is the context of what O’Donnell stated on the Mahre show. Which was never seen on TV, by the way.

However, O’Donnell needs to get in front of this, stop canceling appearances, and face the big ‘ol mean media. She has to dig deep and fight. One might misread her as afraid or intimidated by the circling vultures. Not good. Time to jump in and mix it up. And better sooner than later.

Maher was quoted by CNN tonight (after they showed this clip at the top of their 10PM broadcast) as saying that he is going to keep releasing these tapes (whatever they contain) until she starts appearing on news shows and letting herself be interviewed.

I read the Coons article on Politico. From the sound of it, what he would most likely apologize for to voters is the dread sin of once having been a (gasp!horror!) Republican

I did check Mike Castle’s voting record. You, Patterico shoul;d do the same. He voted against Bill Cassity’s Clear Act Amendment which kept LA oilment out of work. His record indicates he votes 52% with the conservatives. It is the 48% he votes that is a concern. Castle supports Cap and Trade and opposes repealing Obamacare while Obama is President. Americans are tired of Democrats and liberal Republicans. Liberals in general. O’Donnell is not a career politician. That is a plus anywhere.

Maybe, just maybe, the Castle campaign should have dug up some of these videos before the primary. Maybe they should have run a better campaign and not made the assumption that since he was the party’s guy and she was a “nothing” the win was going to be a slam dunk.

I’ve read that Rove was co-ordinating with Castle.
Somebody must have influenced him not to delve too deeply, maybe reassured him that he was the party’s guy and his election was a lock.

Will Delaware prefer a Marxist who raised taxes three times as Delaware County Executive to a very immature and childish underdeveloped personality like Christine O’Donnell? The First State faces a Hobson’s Choice.

Castle was a Republican who managed to amass between $3 million to $8 million in his career politician mode wherein he has held public office of one sort or another since 1966. Would you rather have a crook like Castle or a Marxist like Coons or a half-wit like O’Donnell?

Interesting. Gay marriage? Dems are almost 100% for, Republicans probably more against than for. Abortion? Dems for on demand, Republicans against although most make exceptions (incest, rape, deadly peril to the mother). Immigration? Dems tend towards open borders, Republicans mostly anti-amnesty employer verification types.

How are you against all of those positions?

Just wondering.

Comment by AJsDaddie — 9/18/2010 @ 9:07 pm

Well AJ, you asked very nicely and I will reply in kind.

Dems almost 100% in favor of gay marriage? I have to ask where that number came from. Gay marriage was defeated here in Ca., more from Dems than the Repubs, I do believe. You can correct me on this, I’m typing without looking anything up! But that 100% doesn’t sit well.

Obama certainly believes there is a difference between gay and straight marriages. I believe you are correct when you say more Repubs are against it than for it. Which is where they lose me with the whole “limited goverrnment”.

I am not sure what point you were trying to make with abortion. I no longer believe either side has a moral point to make. But I do not believe it’s ok to stab a fetus in the head to kill them. Other than that, abortion has been settled law for some time and I’m tired of seeing it used as a litmus.

And I am also confused about your statement that Dems might be into ‘open borders’. Or did I read that wrong and misinterpret? I am not into open borders at all, and I don’t believe most Dems are either. I get disgusted with both parties on this issue. If we can’t secure our southern border, and the feds are not so willing to go after the people that hire these workers, well…. then amnesty for illegals seems reasonable. It’S not that I agree with it, because I think we should secure our borders. But if we don’t, I have a tough moral issue making these individuals out to be enemies. I would do the exact the same thing if I were in their shoes.

Oh and PS. I was not trying to make a case about Dems and GOPs. I was trying to make a point about how I think so many people (especially pundits, whether they be tv or radio) get the indie vote wrong all the time. Maybe that’s just my world.

But honestly, I don’t get either side when they start talking about core beliefs. There is so much that they don’t adhere to on both sides.

I’m not trying to be a troll, but I think Patterico runs a nice place and there may be room for real discussion amongst very different viewpoints.

I did check Mike Castle’s voting record. You, Patterico shoul;d do the same. He voted against Bill Cassity’s Clear Act Amendment which kept LA oilment out of work. His record indicates he votes 52% with the conservatives. It is the 48% he votes that is a concern. Castle supports Cap and Trade and opposes repealing Obamacare while Obama is President. Americans are tired of Democrats and liberal Republicans. Liberals in general. O’Donnell is not a career politician. That is a plus anywhere

Zelsdorf:

We were talking about the stimulus. You said Castle voted for it. You were wrong.

For what it’s worth, I not only sent a trackback to Goldstein when I published UPDATE x4, but I also e-mailed him since then, to specifically direct his attention to the fact that the author of this post disagrees with his interpretation. He acknowledged receipt of the e-mail but has not updated his post to reflect my disagreement with the way he portrayed what I wrote. INTENTIONALISM!!!

Patterico – Reading Goldstein’s post interpreting what you wrote here, I believe I can safely say that Jeff has flunked Intentionalism 101.

It’s no surprise that Levin wants jump on that bandwagon since he has either misinterpreted or lied about all your prior posts. Plus, I thought as of this morning Levin said he was done talking about you. Another lie by Levin.

I won’t take a lot of time on this because it’s leading seriously off topic, but here’s one of the more interesting positions:

“But if we don’t [secure the borders], I have a tough moral issue making these individuals out to be enemies. I would do the exact the same thing if I were in their shoes.”

This to me is something of a straw man. Nobody was calling illegals enemies; I believe that the vast majority of folks like me with strong immigration enforcement sentiment have nothing against the immigrants themselves, but that doesn’t stop us from wanting the laws enforced.

The borders need to be enforced, and we have to remove the incentive to break those laws by increasing the legal pressure on both the immigrants (via deportation, not catch and release) and those who benefit (the employers, through broader implementation of E-verify and stiff penalties).

This position might be stricter than moderate Republicans have demonstrated but it’s consistent with the conservative platform represented by the Tea Party. Meanwhile the Democrats seem to range from the moderate Republican position to those like Luis Gutierrez who inhabit the extreme liberal end of the debate. So unless you’re even more right than the conservatives I find it hard to imagine that your position doesn’t fit somewhere in the Dem / Rep spectrum.

My point is that most social views are embraced within the Dem / Rep panoply. The problem is that your specific positions may not all be held in a single plank. But that may be due to the fact that with social issues individual positions are often an amalgam of personal decisions whose sum total may not always be consistent. Fiscal positions are pretty straightforward – you’re either big government or small government. As you point out, though, social positions are more nebulous and what seems conservative on one issue could be at odds with the conservative position on another.

That’s why I think the conservative movement would be better served by focusing on the fiscal issues – reduce government, lower taxes, eliminate earmarks – and spending less time on social issues. And to try to bring my comment back on track, focusing on fiscal issues would make this entire discussion about O’Donnell’s wicca dalliance a moot point.

I guess Bill Maher dug it out from his archives. Okay, here’s my take. The hair isn’t current, obviously. But other than that, I think she looks pretty cute. Yawn. The better question is, is it really ehtical for Maher to be digging in his own archives in an attempt to damage someone running for office ten years later? That looks pretty despicable to me. The message is, if you disagree with him politically, never go on what is his unserious show and have some laughs, because he will use it against you down the road. That’s actually pretty pathertic.

I don’t want to get in a blog war with Dan Riehl because he’s not very ehtical and sort of pathertic — but really. Is this the best the RNC can do with their money?

Patterico @282 – Riehl is really part of the solution with that part of the post. Really gets to the kernel of the matter and figures out how to help Christine instead of dwelling in the past. Maybe he should ask his buddy Levin what to do.

“But if we don’t [secure the borders], I have a tough moral issue making these individuals out to be enemies. I would do the exact the same thing if I were in their shoes.”

This to me is something of a straw man. Nobody was calling illegals enemies; I believe that the vast majority of folks like me with strong immigration enforcement sentiment have nothing against the immigrants themselves, but that doesn’t stop us from wanting the laws enforced.

The borders need to be enforced, and we have to remove the incentive to break those laws by increasing the legal pressure on both the immigrants (via deportation, not catch and release) and those who benefit (the employers, through broader implementation of E-verify and stiff penalties).

I don’t really get why that was a strawman and I don’t think we are too far OT. I think this is a relevant argument, but I will move it to another post if need be.

The borders need to be enforced, and we have to remove the incentive to break those laws by increasing the legal pressure on both the immigrants (via deportation, not catch and release) and those who benefit (the employers, through broader implementation of E-verify and stiff penalties

Apparently, I totally fucked that up. I thought I was agreeing with you! May I give it another shot?
I wanted to make a point about people such as myself not fitting in to either the GOP or the DEM platforms. They both lose me when they start talking about core beliefs, because their endorsements almost never live up to their core beliefs. And so it goes with voters…

I truly don’t see the fundamental differences in the parties that many here see.

Man, did you learn NOTHING from Karl Rove’s week? You have to toe the party line 100% without deviation or you are RINO trash and out of the movement, finis. It has nothing to do with whether what you say is true, or a fair criticism, or just an expression of your own opinion of someone’s chances (IF they are on the “approved” list, of course, although if they are on the “death” list, it can’t help to appear too friendly). Of course these Commissars of GoodThink don’t really represent the grassroots, but they are loud, excited, and out for vengeance upon anyone who dares defy them. It’s like sharks when blood is in the water, they are frenzied. If they can’t take over the Tea Party movement and the GOP, they will destroy both, because in their view they won’t be worth saving. Good luck!

You seriously don’t see this as a weakness? I mean, I get that you don’t give a shit about it. I don’t give a shit about it. I don’t really give a shit about the entire race.

But I think there are people whose impression of O’Donnell is going to be formed by the media’s portrayal of her. And I think this could get out in front of her and do some serious damage to her image if it isn’t handled properly.

It’s a weakness. Like Palin’s weakness on policy. True believers don’t care, but the not-yet-convinced might.

Hmmmm. Perhaps that explains Rove’s childish tantrum. At least Rove had the sense to walk back his hissy fit. Sort of.

Isn’t the black arts more Rove’s schtick anyhow?

You mean he dabbled into witchcraft too??? *points and shrieks*: WIIITCH!

No, I mean Carl is the architect. The guy who pulls strings from behind the curtain. That’s what he’s famous for.

Now is it beyond the realm of possibility that Rove intentionally lulled Mike Castle into a false sense of security.
Is it possible that his adamant assertion that O’Donnell has no chance of being elected is a calculated move to engender sympathy for Christine. Give her a national spotlight. Toss raw meat to the Huffpo WaPo CBS NYT congomerate to bring out their baser instincts, so they are on full display right on through the election season?

Turd Blossom is a pretty smart guy. Smart guys can subdue their egos for the greater good, don’t care who gets the credit.

I’m just saying.

Ousting Castle was pretty good shooting. So direct and accurate It’s sort of hard to believe that a grass roots movement, a hive mind if you will, without leader or rudder, would have developed the idea to take him out.

You know what I don’t get? Rove goes on TV, states the unvarnished truth about O’Donnell and he is either a traitor or turd having a tantrum . He is none of those things. O’Donnell has some baggage and her base can either deal with that or shoot the messenger…of course they went after Rove, after all he was supposed to put on a big smile and lie his ass off.

But that is not what Rove does. So people can say he was working with Castle or whatever, but it was not Rove that was responsible for the stuff in O’Donnell’s background, it was O’Donnell and the truth is she needs to listen to someone like Rove if she is going to win this election. Pandering to your base might work if all you want is their adoration, they will see you as a victim no matter what…but if you are going to win in a general election you need to more than your base.

I know people think that Rove was overlooking the fact that Palin is magic and she will get this young woman elected. They think that Castle was an evil man who deserved to be destroyed and now they will move on to the next phase of attacking and destroying the ruling class by taking out the bearded marxist. I think a lot of them think that Democrats are so toxic that she can win no matter what she does or says.

Don’t count on it. Rove is not the enemy, he did not throw a tantrum just because he did not dissemble and tell you what you want to hear.

How to help Christine: point out long and loud that it doesn’t make a bit of difference that she dated a Goth in her 20s.

Done.

Pointing out that people who continue to pound the meme are Kos-worthy sensationalists is a good second option. I’d say Riehl is following that route.

I missed how you’re helping Christine. Maybe it was where you were wondering why she was on the ballot.

Comment by AJsDaddie — 9/18/2010 @ 11:18 pm

AJ, It does not really work that way. One of the reasons I disliked Obama from the very beginning is that I did not really know anything about him and any attempts to pin down his past or growing up were seen as unimportant or dwelling on a past long gone.

But in the case of O’Donnell people seem to think that we are not supposed to look at the lawsuit she filed in 2003 or the tax lien from 2006 or the unpaid wages from 2008. I think her problem is that the stuff from her 30’s is going to effect the attitude people have of her as she enters her 40s.

It is not one thing, it is a bunch of stuff;

For instance, I was amazed that people were able to ovelook Obama and Wright. That just floored me…however, the truth was they were too busy hearing the message to see the man. I think a lot of people are aware of the fact today that they were sold a bill of goods when it comes to Obama and maybe because of that they are more leery of people giving speeches and expecting everyone to take them at their word.

If Maher has a bunch of these things, it will tell people that O’Donnell was a regular on his show and that she liked the attention. Even if they do not believe everything she says matters, they might think the constant need to be out there in front of a camera, the center of attention…is indicative of something else in her character.

I am not saying this because I hate the woman or anything, or because I want to be called a RINO..but ridicule and suspicion are tough to overcome once they take root and I am afraid that is what she faces now.

You know what I don’t get? Rove goes on TV, states the unvarnished truth about O’Donnell and he is either a traitor or turd having a tantrum .

I didn’t say Rove was a traitor. I said he was the architect. Turd Blossom is his nickname, and I only use it to point out the character trait. He isn’t looking for accolade, just results.
Doesn’t care who takes the credit.

So he goes to Castle to advise on the campaign. What do you think he said?
Something like maybe, “Mike – I wouldn’t even worry about the girl. She has so many problems.”

But here’s the kicker. Castle knows all of these things already. He knows all about her faults because she ran two times before. All of Delaware knows. You think this is a shocking revelation? You think this is the first time Delaware has given Christine the ugly eyeball?
Guess again.

This is just the first time YOU ever heard of her. Not them.
She’s their homey.

And they’ve had the same two guys, running the same tired old campaigns for decades.
Joe Biden, 32 years as Senator. Mike Castle, 43 years, State House, State Senate, Lt Gov, Governor, House of Rep.
These guys are ready for retirement.
It’s time for a change – (Joe Biden’s campaign slogan back in 1972)

It is only my opinion but I think that what is happening now is a good example of what has been occurring for a long time with candidates and the supporters whom the purists deem as Rinos.
The key difference is that the criticisms about them generally have to do with their record or positions on some issues. Because of the vetting process the party has you don’t often end up with a candidate who has some strange baggage.
The purists must wonder at times why those damned Rinos don’t just go away and leave it to the chosen. Are the RINOS really that dense and can’t understand they are not welcome?
The better question might be “What motivates a significant number of people to continue to stick around?” and “What can I learn from that type of commitment to party unity?”

Over at Little Green Footballs Chuck is beating the anti-O’Donnell drum.

One post he dug up has Christine being interviewed by Bill O’Riely about cloning and the ethical ramification of hybridizing mice and human dna.

The thing is Chuck whistles past the issue, pretending like this sort of thing isn’t happening.
Then he says “This girl is a loon thinking Mice will have human brains” apparently without checking the facts or his own google ads.
You know how the google analytics post topical ads for whatever the post is about?
Right under where Chuck basicly calls her a mental defective liar for even suggesting such a thing, google is running ads boasting about the mouse chimera (human mouse hybrid) program at Stanford.

Maher: We’ve got a witch! A witch! Burn her! Burn!
Voter: How do you know she is a witch?
Maher: She looks like one.
O’Donnell: I’m not a witch.
Voter: But you are dressed as one.
O’Donnell: They dressed me up like this.
Maher: No, we didn’t, no…yes, a bit.
O’Donnell: And this isn’t my nose, it’s a false one.
Maher: Well, we did do the nose. And the hat — but she is a witch! Burn her! Witch! She’s got a wart.
Voter: What makes you think she is a witch?
Maher: Well, she turned me into a newt…

I saw this at Rasmussen and thought it was interesting, especially the last part. Only 68% of O’Donnell voters know for sure who they will vote for in November:

Democrat Chris Coons holds a double-digit lead over Republican hopeful Christine O’Donnell in the first Rasmussen Reports post-primary survey of the U.S. Senate race in Delaware.

Coons earns 53% of the vote to O’Donnell’s 42%, with leaners included. One percent (1%) prefer some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided.

The Delaware race is now viewed as Solid Democrat in the Rasmussen Reports Election 2010 Senate Balance of Power rankings.

This marks a remarkable turnaround in a race that at the beginning of the month was rated Solid Republican and was on track to be a GOP pickup. At that time, Congressman Mike Castle led Coons as he had been leading all year. O’Donnell trailed Coons at that time 47% to 36%.

But O’Donnell, a conservative activist picking up endorsements from Sarah Palin and South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint and riding a Tea Party wave of opposition, upset the more moderate Castle in Tuesday’s state Republican Primary. Her victory highlights the voter anger sweeping the nation this year. That anger is described in a new book by Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen, Mad as Hell: How the Tea Party Movement is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two Party System.

An excerpt from the book, One Nation Under Revolt was published yesterday in the wake of O’Donnell’s victory.

If leaners are not included, Coons, the elected executive of the state’s largest county, posts a 51% to 40% lead over O’Donnell. Leaners are those who initially indicate no preference for either of the candidates but answer a follow-up question and say they are leaning towards a particular candidate. From this point forward, Rasmussen Reports considers results with leaners the primary indicator of the race.

Coons led O’Donnell 46% to 36% in a survey in August, but a month earlier the two were in a virtual tie.

Seventy-one percent (71%) of Delaware Republicans now support O’Donnell after the party’s divisive primary, while Coons picks up 84% of the state’s Democratic voters. Voters not affiliated with either major party prefer O’Donnell by eight points.

Seventy-eight percent (78%) of Coons voters say they are already certain how they will vote in November, while just 68% of O’Donnell’s supporters say the same.

First, it’s not clear that she did much more than date a guy and have a picnic on an altar. Indeed, its not clear she knew 100% what was going on. But since she put the headline on it, “I dabbled in witchcraft” there is nothing wrong with taking it as she intentionally did exactly that.

Second, um, who cares? What am I supposed to be offended by? That she tried something new and different? And you know, this is much more important than how she will vote on cap and trade or Obamacare.

Yes, personally I find witchcraft to be more silly than offensive, but not to the point that if anyone tries it, even on a date, that I am going to drum them out of office. I am not sure I could vote for a currently practicing witch not because of the religious issue, but because it is so dippy. But trying it? Pbbbbt.

I mean taking drugs is actually bad. You fund evil gangsterism all over the place, and very often screw up your brain cells. But I didn’t hold Barky’s past COCAINE use against him. There was so much more to hate about him, frankly.

Also I don’t believe that Coons merely dabbled in bearded Marxism. I think he only shaved the beard.

Personally I put the whole thing in the same category as her being against masturbation. Now, mind you can put me in the pro-column, but ultimately its silly to care what she thinks about the subject.

I think also James Taranto nailed it the other day when he made this point. Maybe o’donnell is this year’s Ollie North. Remember how North ran for the senate, and all the democrats all across the country worked endlessly to defeat this threat to the republic… in 1994. In other words, it might be the case that the democrats focused so much of their fire on North that they made the wave election of 1994 happen more easily. Ditto with O’Donnell.

Hey, does anybody remember that guy in Massachusetts who was running for Teddy’s senate seat? The former nude model who was unelectable because in his twenties he appeared in a centerfold? What ever happened to that guy anyway?

They think that Castle was an evil man who deserved to be destroyed
Comment by Terrye — 9/19/2010 @ 3:21 am

What? Losing a primary election is tantamount to being destroyed? Telling Castle supporters things about their candidate which they’d rather not hear uttered in public is implying that he’s evil?

Hmmmm, sounds to me like some folks who’s guy got his *ss kicked by the second string are having a great, big tantrum.

If Rove was helping anyone during that primary, it was Castle. So lecturing the great unwashed that O’Donnell needed to listen to Uncle Karl to help her take care of some of her baggage is kind of silly. It smacks of whinging.

That baggage needed to be found and aired by the Castle folks BEFORE the primary. With all of the party resources they had, they didn’t find most of the “good” stuff.

Now they’re ticked off. And whiny. Karl included. His initial reaction came off as petulant. No, she was not his choice and he doesn’t have to support her at all. In fact, he’s perfectly entitled to announce his support for the bearded Marxist. After all, he has far, far less “baggage” than that witch.

But Rove chose to walk back some of his foot stomping by talking about his support for Tea Party principles. He knew how he came across. There are ways to express your disappointment that your guy didn’t win without acting like a 6th grader.

Too bad Castle has yet to learn this.

Now, if Rove (and others) can GET OVER IT, perhaps O’Donnell will accept his help. She should, if it’s offered in good faith.

It would also be nice if that other guy with far, far less “baggage”, Castle, would help too. I’m afraid though that he, along with a good many other self-styled “pragmatists”, aren’t pragmatic enough to put aside their own hurt and anger and work to elect a conservative to the Senate.

I guess the preaching the virtues of pragmatism to others it a whole lot easier than actually having to practice it yourself.

No, they went after Jeb, through push polls, after Romney when he tried for Ted’s seat, through some spurious headlines, anyone they consider they do this to, this is not new people, only the intensity
is

I first saw a link to that at the Drudgereport.com on Wednesday morning, but it was taken down after only a short while. The reason? Not totally sure. However, I know Matt Drudge leans right, although I wouldn’t think that would color his judgment so greatly that he’d alter his website to refute simple, plain reality.

I wonder if the people in Delaware who voted for O’Donnell are so resentful of the status quo — of either Democrat or Republican, left or right — that anyone with a clearly identifiable name turned them off. IOW, they may be so ideologically untethered that even if an ultra-leftist like Coons becomes their next senator, they may shrug it off and go their merry little way.

Now, if Rove (and others) can GET OVER IT, perhaps O’Donnell will accept his help.

Not sure if this is the case with Rove or Castle, but if they’re fully aware of the demographics of Delaware — and I’m sure they are — and how that relates to the percentage of liberals, centrists (or “centrists”) and conservatives in the state’s population (and voter rolls), they may be thinking about that far more than the particulars of candidate A or candidate B either winning or losing.

I’d definitely say that Rove and Castle were whiny or poor losers — or guilty or sour grapes — if Delaware were a staunchly conservative, pro-Republican-Party state. But it’s not.

He acknowledged receipt of the e-mail but has not updated his post to reflect my disagreement with the way he portrayed what I wrote. INTENTIONALISM!!!

See? This is why no one trusts you.

In my email response to you, I asked if your response to my reading was in the very post of yours I’d already linked. It is. So why do I need to update my post to reference something that is posted in the post I’ve already linked to?

Oh. And also, I linked not just your post, but the first comment. From you. Which, to remind you, was this:

When I first heard about this I thought it was a practical joke. I read a PowerLine post saying Maher said he had video, and I thought: oh, he just wants to test the Tea Partiers to see how outrageous a thing she could say, and still get support from the True Conservatives.

Even though the video is real, this still tests that principle. I think this kills any chance she had dead. But I know the Riehls and Levins of the world will find some way to brush this off. It will be interesting to watch how they do it.

I did not say that losing a primary was the same as being destroyed, I was referring to the vitriol that was directed at Castle, it was excessive.

And I still think that going after Rove for just stating some facts do not want to see does not help O’Donnell. Thus far most of her supporters have spent more time going after anyone and everyone who says something they don’t want to hear than they have actually dealing with the issues themselves.

They seem to think the best defense is a good offense. Fine, but that does not actually resolve anything.

wadikitty–I agree with a great deal in your long post. Among other observations you point out that the Castle campaign missed some interesting things about Christine. In effect you are saying that Castle and company did not properly vet their opponent when they had the chance.

There is another side to this vetting issue (which Terrye also has raised). And I feel completely justified and honorable in bringing it up again, because I have been posting all week trying to remind people that the primary season is over and O’Donnell is the Republican candidate who now must beat the bearded Marxist. I just hope to G_D that Christine’s supporters have vetted her. Without any votes or prior public service there seems to be little evidence or actual proof for us out here in the world that O’Donnell is the serious fiscal conservative and Constitutionalist with a pure servant’s heart she claims to be. Is there anything more than her own word to support this? I sincerely hope she is all those things, and I hope her most spirited and vocal supporters know for a fact that she is, can convince voters that she is,–and are prepared to make damn sure she’s all those things when she is elected. Because if she is not those things–if she turns out to be an opportunist or a fraud–then the tea party movement and conservatives will be greatly harmed.

Do these bloggers on the right think that someone whose job just got shipped to China because of our excessive regulation and taxes gives half a crap about whether Christine O’Donnell “dabled into witchcraft” when she was younger?

Do our self-appointed guardians of “the Buckley Rule” think that the tens of thousands of Delawareans who will be forced off their private health plans, whose businesses will be decimated by cap-and-trade, whose 2nd Amendment rights are under attack, whose right to be left the hell alone is about to evaporate, really care that when Christine O’Donnell was young and irresponsible, she was young and irresponsible?

Not sure if this is the case with Rove or Castle, but if they’re fully aware of the demographics of Delaware — and I’m sure they are — and how that relates to the percentage of liberals, centrists (or “centrists”) and conservatives in the state’s population (and voter rolls), they may be thinking about that far more than the particulars of candidate A or candidate B either winning or losing.

I’d definitely say that Rove and Castle were whiny or poor losers — or guilty or sour grapes — if Delaware were a staunchly conservative, pro-Republican-Party state. But it’s not.

Comment by Mark — 9/19/2010 @ 9:59 am

Why are you putting Rove and Castle together here?

All Rove said was that O’Donnell needed to deal with issues such as her finances, her tax problems, and other problems that will matter to people beyond her base. The reaction has been so what if she lied, so what if she did not pay the help, so what if she did not pay her taxes, so what if she made some strange claims in her multi million dollar law suit…anyone who has a problem with this stuff is either a liberal, a RINO or a sore loser.

And then they move on to telling us all why it won’t matter if she bales on the Sunday talk shows and it is not her fault if Maher makes fun of her…the only people that will care are liberals, RINOs and sore losers.

etc.

I think that people have been too hard on Rove for just stating the obvious.

Do these bloggers on the right think that someone whose job just got shipped to China because of our excessive regulation and taxes gives half a crap about whether Christine O’Donnell “dabled into witchcraft” when she was younger?

Do our self-appointed guardians of “the Buckley Rule” think that the tens of thousands of Delawareans who will be forced off their private health plans, whose businesses will be decimated by cap-and-trade, whose 2nd Amendment rights are under attack, whose right to be left the hell alone is about to evaporate, really care that when Christine O’Donnell was young and irresponsible, she was young and irresponsible?

Comment by John Hitchcock — 9/19/2010 @ 10:53 am

Castle co sponsored a bill that called for the repeal of Obamacare and he had a far better chance of defeating Coons.

It’s not the bloggers that people like Jacobson should be scrutinizing and worrying about. It’s all the nitwit voters in Delaware who love the notion that politicians and policies of the left reflect a fair-minded, civilized, compassionate, noble, humane and sophisticated approach to life that need to be scrutinized.

did not say that losing a primary was the same as being destroyed, I was referring to the vitriol that was directed at Castle, it was excessive.

Then you should say that. The hyperbole smacks of hysteria and/or the tantrum of someone who didn’t get his/her way.

By the fact that Rove walked back his intemperate remarks indicates that he realized that he over did it. It was anger borne of disappointment to be sure, but it came across as petulant. He knew it. He has since tried to mitigate it in the name of, dare I say it, pragmatism.

You can only stomp your feet and point the finger for so long.

Fine, but that does not actually resolve anything.

And what, pray tell, are we to resolve? Christine O’Donnell is the nominee. You want to keep fighting an election which is over, have at it. You should have been spending that time and effort during the primary, but it’s your time, you can spend it as you please.

Castle’s supporters didn’t fight hard enough, in part it seems from their juvenile reactions, because they thought he was entitled to win the primary and was running against someone way beneath his lofty station.

while we’re talking about flaws maybe we should talk about how Mr. Instapundit says Team Boehnerhomo is salivating for the pork they can dole out when they get the gavel back

… for reals this new-found Team R penchant for criticizing the Team R candidates is a lot new-found I think so maybe we just haven’t heard yet of anyone pressing candidate to answer the question of if elected will you vote to perpetuate the tired provenly failed leadership of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell

Make no mistake it’s the vacuum of leadership what permits a self-promoting fungal parasite like Sarah Palin to thrive even in a hostile media. O’Donnell’s victory over John Cornhole’s corrupt NRSC machine cast a bright spotlight on the fail what is at the heart of the Team R what his headed for a very successful November.

And Moses spake and declared: “If a woman is accused of being a witch, she shall be taken to the Levites. And they shall determine whether she is a hot babe. And shall it be determined she is a hot babe, she shall be appointed to the Sanhedrin. And should the Levites fail to appoint her to the Sanhedrin, hot ashes shall be poured on their heads, and their children shall have acne and eczema. But should it be seen she is not a hot babe, she shall be sent to toil in the fields and milk goats.”

Levitonomy 1:11

This witchcraft charge is nonsense. Bill Maher is a creep whom I would not allow within a 100 miles of my daughter.

The lady has had a loose mouth. But maybe she did not understand what politics would be like these days, 11 years ago.

I did see that Delaware has the “Blue Enigma Party”
which inspired low brow humorists to change “Enigma” to make it the “Blue Enema Party”. Pledges to clean up politics in Delaware got a “no thanks” from the voters. Go figure.

Mr. Colonel I think this get Christie O campaign should think twice before aligning itself with a corrupt Team R establishment what fought tooths and also nails for the McCain Murkowski Crist nexus of cowardly fail. That was their idea of the leadership our failed declining sad little country needed in 2010 to counter the depredations of Obama and his dirty socialists.

O’Donnell WILL lose but that is besides the point. She makes the GOP look bad. Rove’s point is that supporters need to consider the reputation of the party [R] she represents. This witchcraft thing is small potatoes. Campaign finance issues (which are very significant) aside, anyone supporting a person who believes evolution is fake, and that there are mice with human brains is not terribly bright. She can be described as not only scientifically illiterate, but anti-science: “Psychics exploit the human beings natural desire that longs for something higher, the same way a pimp exploits the natural desire to be with the opposite sex…psychics put people in spiritual harm, the same way pimps put people in physical harm.” {Bill Maher 10/01 – posted on YouTube, 10/14/07]

On social issues, I think that her radical stands on masturbation = adultery, women should be forced to bear incest rapists babies, that co-ed dorms will lead to “orgy rooms”, giving out free condoms is like “legalizing drunk driving,” …. and many other quotes from Christine O’Donnell do not represent mainstream conservatives, and are frankly, embarrassing, or should be.

“Psychics exploit the human beings natural desire that longs for something higher, the same way a pimp exploits the natural desire to be with the opposite sex…psychics put people in spiritual harm, the same way pimps put people in physical harm.”

Nk, like you, I continue to be confused: messing around with “magick” games to show off for friends in college, bad. Snorting up cocaine in college, understandable.

But most of all, claiming to be a Marxist in college (after a trip to flipping Kenya to see a “better” way), added to a history of raising taxes (while claiming not to do so)…well, all I hear is crickets.

I still think O’Donnell should make light of this by with a press conference that at least she wasn’t a member of Wiccans for Obama (which exists as a group). She should end the press conference by saying “Blessed be,” and give Palin-style wink.

Of course, some people would explode. But then, they aren’t going to vote anyway. They just like to complain.

I understand there’s ruefulness afoot Mr. daley. People are rueful that Sarah Palin tipped an in the bag race away from safe establishment Team R SEIU fanboy Mike Castle.

But it’s not Christine’s fault she won and I think it’s sort of unseemly for to see the knives coming out for her from people who are decidedly less stabby and carvey when it comes to the whorish self-promoting political hanger-on what is exploiting the situation to co-brand with Christine’s perceived… roguey maverickyness and using the Delaware fiasco for to tap into a lucrative and energized base of support in future.

It can’t have escaped people’s notice that the same voters what put Christine over the top could very well elect a Palin over an establishment slut like Romney or Pawlenty in 2012. And yet it’s not a lot commented upon in favor of witchery and masturbations.

and many other quotes from Christine O’Donnell do not represent mainstream conservatives

I’m pissed off because her background and idiosyncrasies don’t even point to her being a bonafide conservative, much less a mainstream one.

I wouldn’t mind it if the people who favored her over Castle said “we prefer one squish over the other!” Instead, they believe they selected the Correct One, the True One, the Legitimate One.

Politico.com, 9-14-10:

…The call features the voice of Kristin Murray, who ran O’Donnell’s 2008 Senate campaign against then-Sen. Joe Biden, and who charges that her old boss “is no conservative.”

“I got into politics because I believe in conservative values and wanted to make a difference. But I was shocked to learn that O’Donnell is no conservative,” says Murray, according to a script obtained by POLITICO.

“This is her third Senate race in five years. As O’Donnell’s manager, I found out she was living on campaign donations — using them for rent and personal expenses, while leaving her workers unpaid and piling up thousands in debt,” she says.

Perhaps the most biting line in the call delivered by Murray: “She wasn’t concerned about conservative causes. O’Donnell just wanted to make a buck.”

David Keegan, a former O’Donnell aide, told The New York Times earlier this month that when he found out about O’Donnell’s personal financial problems, he decided he could no longer work for her.

“We are constantly trying to hold her back from spending. She was financially completely irresponsible,” Keegan told the Times.

It’s Sunday. It appears several institutions may have let out their patients for the afternoon. But aren’t these folks supposed to be on their meds before they are allowed out in public? Man, the rambling and babbling is sad. But it’s always best to stay out of their way and not make eye contact.

“And yet it’s not a lot commented upon in favor of witchery and masturbations.”

Mr. Feets – I am still insouciantly resting easy with a tasty beverage, but no masturbations or vegan pancakes. I may indulge in some chocolate ice cream as an afterthought to my creamy corn chowder, however.

“Finally, Legal Insurrection provides a sterling example of how not to end the intra-party feuding over O’Donnell’s nomination. He’s absolutely right that she’s our candidate, so let’s all act like it. He’s absolutely a hypocrite to then slander his opponents by suggesting they opposed O’Donnell to get “high blog traffic.” And he’s out of his freakin’ mind to then suggest that the Powerline guys or Patterico or, well, us don’t want “to see our kids grow up in a nation in which the state is the servant not the master.” As longtime moron It’s Vintage, Duh observed to me, some people are demanding “unity” in the same sense that Democrats demand “bipartisanship.””

Yes, daley, when the RINOs win primaries and demand the Conservatives buck up and support them (you cannot win without us), that’s somehow alright. But when a Conservative wins a primary and tells the moderates “you can’t win without me” that’s somehow arrogant and something to be destroyed. Talk about Murkowski, Crist, Specter, Bennett. And talk about the people who are trying to argue 49 is the new 51.

This is the year “go along get along” got very ill. If you won’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything. A majority without principles is useless. And I don’t need no stinkin Chamberlains and Quislings.

I also think that pimps are lower than rats, trading on the debasement and degradation of other people.

If you don’t agree … have a nice life.

Had I been a Delaware voter, I would have voted for Castle. But I cannot stand unfairness and if Bill Maher told me it was raining I would kick him in the teeth for peeing on my leg (stole that one from somebody). So, by and large, I’m on the lady’s side on this issue.

My Koran and Bible are on the same bookcase. With a five-volume set on Greek Mythology. The Odyssey and the Iliad in 3,000-year old Greek. I have read the Tao Te Ching and The Book of Five Rings. Hagagure, too. I read both of Alistair Crowley’s books and then threw them in the garbage.

“Yes, daley, when the RINOs win primaries and demand the Conservatives buck up and support them (you cannot win without us), that’s somehow alright.”

John – Fine except that’s not what Jacobson is saying. He’s saying shut up and do what I tell you.
Do you like to be told what to do? I don’t. I thought that is what this whole freedom thing is about. Prof. Jacobson and the purity of principles crowd can FOAD for all I’m concerned. Delaware has a choice of Senate candidates determined by its voters. I know who I would choose between a bearded marxist statist and an unqualified loony woman spouting conservative platitudes, but nobody is going to tell me what not to say about them. Thank you very much.

It seems to me like it ought to be possible to come up with a right wing candidate who HADN’t consorted with satanists, HADN’T repeatedly been subjected to legal action for failing to pay their bills, HADN’T gotten into trouble with the IRS for non-payment of taxes, DIDN’T engage in promiscuity and then start sermonizing about the virtues of chastity, after they’re through with their promiscuous phase (plus it looks a little odd if you’re preaching WHILE you’re living with a man you aren’t married to, which appears to be what O’Donnell is now doing), and HADN’T sued their employers for millions of dollars in a bogus sex discrimination suit. It would also be nice to have a right wing candidate who wasn’t constantly running for office and using campaign funds to pay their personal expenses while leaving behind a trail of campaign workers who are complaining that they weren’t paid for the work THEY did.

It’s too late to do anything about this election, but it might be something to think about before the next election.

We can find way, way better people than this to stand for office, and if we can’t, then we don’t deserve to win.

Seriously, I would like to see both Republicans and Democrats state what their standards are for candidates. Truly. It would be interesting to hear both the DNC and RNC bloviate, and then we could compare those bloviations to some of the Grand Poohbahs in each party.

Patterico is doing opposition research and concocting campaign slogans for the Democrat, and using his considerable elevation to shout them from the housetops at maximum volume.

Reasons don’t matter. “Spin” doesn’t matter. At the end of the spin, after all the bluster and BOMFOG and linking and quoting, Patterico is working hard for the Democratic candidate. End discussion.

Regards,
Ric

Ric,

In your quest for unity, you said on Protein Wisdom:

Frey told me everything I need to know about himself during the discussion of juries.

He’s the sort of prosecutor that says “to Hell with justice and the law, we gotta convict this nago to keep our phony-baloney jobs.”

When they make me Emperor, he’ll be doing boilerplate wills and messy divorces from a second-floor walkup, and have a Court order forbidding him to come within ten feet of Government property without a valid writ in hand.

Regards,
Ric

I never said ANYTHING to indicate that I am the type of prosecutor you describe.

Interestingly, part of Mark Levin’s slam on me was that I declared myself to be concerned about the possibility of innocents on Death Row.

Your comment, incidentally, was made on a blog whose proprietor not only totally misrepresented this post, but also today insinuated that I am taking “crazy party money” from the GOP. Evidence? Nah, he’s just “willing to bet” it is the case.

Interesting that, in their zeal for UNITY!!! so many conservatives are interested in personally tearing down their brethren.

Have you ever considered that, to the extent Delaware voters pay any attention to what is said on blogs, they might appreciate an honest view from a conservative who isn’t going to pretend like this clip isn’t the type of thing that puts people off?

One approach is: this clip won’t affect moderates and independents at all, and I don’t find anything the slightest bit strange about it. If that’s your honest approach, great.

Another approach is: it’s an odd clip and I can see where it will alienate low-attention voters. However, she could be a freaking witch now and it doesn’t matter, because we have bigger things to concern ourselves with, like the deficit and our childrens’ future.

That happens to be my approach, and it carries with it the benefit of being honest and from the heart. That might actually be a winning argument to some people.

So how’s about observing the call for unity and stop trying to run down your fellow conservative?

When you find one in Delaware, let me know, Copeland, a Dupont, Chatworthy, an Annapolis ’67
grad, Ting, an esteemed law professor all crashed and burned in the last dozen or so years, all part of the Castle coffee clatch.

Honestly, I thought the seat for most of the countries corporate headquarters would be wiser, but that is not at all clear.

I don’t know why it’s important what type of person she is. People want me to go out and write posts about how Coons is a bad person because of bearded Marxism or something. I don’t think the “who’s a better person?” question is the ground that she or her supporters should be fighting on, because I think they will lose. So we should concentrate on the principles. She (as far as I can tell) will vote my way, solidly. That’s what we need. Period.

If anything, this discussion OUGHT to be useful for helping demonstrate what I just said: namely, the ground on which we should be fighting.

I think we need to be clear-eyed about which type of nominee we have, and plan accordingly. Which means acknowledging the negatives, dealing with them in a straightforward fashion, and coming up with reasons that she should still be the voters’ choice.

People can usually smell bullshit. If you try to paper it over, there’s still the smell. So why not identify our weaknesses, so we can go with our strengths?

Our strengths are not pitiful defenses of her shortcomings. Our strengths are: her vote is what matters, and we need it.

Our strengths are the fiscally conservative principles she stands for.

I get it. I think she’ll vote my way… but can a loose cannon get elected?
Plus that whole “voting my way” thing may get as flaky as she is.
My point was that maybe she is electable… she’s certainly better than some of the people that have already been elected and hold office.
I know that an “I’m not a slimeweasel like Chuck Schumer” is not any way to run a campaign… but it does give a little perspective in the handwringing here and now.

The laughs are old news and over for now (I’m sure there will be more), part of turning the page is to look under the hood on Coons; focus on the real opponent.
I don’t see why you’d have to write anything on Coons, but we can all stop beating the left’s drum on this one.
I’ve had my fun with it, now it is time to get onto helping her win.
I’m gonna go send her $20… she’s already given me my moneys worth of entertainment

Don’t get me wrong, I think she’s far from the perfect candidate. So was Castle (and many conservatives already holding office) for that matter, but really unless she killed or assaulted someone, who cares what kind of silly shit she did when she was in college? If she was dabbling last year, that might be different.

But the blame ultimately falls fully on the shoulders of the voters, even more so in this age of the Internet, in which obtaining information is easier than ever before.

So just as the Greece/Spain/Mexico/Venezuela type of mess that is the state of California has to be blamed on the majority of its voters who believed “progressive” politicians and policies were wonderful, the responsibility for O’Donnell has to be taken by a majority of Republican-registered voters in Delaware who — again, even more so in this age of the Internet — did not do enough homework in figuring out what their candidate was really all about.

Huffingtonpost.com:

Christine O’Donnell’s win over the long tenured U.S. Representative Mike Castle, 53% to 47% (+6% points), might have been a shocker to most, but what really happened, and what most observers missed, was that turnout was higher than normal in lower Delaware (Kent and Sussex Counties), and average in upper Delaware (New Castle County).

Polls underestimated these levels for most of the campaign, and thus, missed the trend.

Castle won New Castle County 58% to 42%, but lost Kent and Sussex counties, 64% to 36%.

O’Donnell’s support in both Kent and Sussex was twice that of Castle’s. It appears that Castle failed to mobilize liberal and moderate Republicans, and relied too heavily on the state party for his campaigning. Although Castle was well funded, O’Donnell’s last minute support from outside sources allowed her to communicate her message and get out the vote; and it paid off.

Segue to the polls. The last poll conducted before the election (Public Policy Polling), 9/11-9/12) showed O’Donnell with a 47% to 44% advantage over Castle with 8% undecided, and a margin of error of roughly 4%. So how did O’Donnell beat her estimates? It could be that the 8% of formerly undecided voters decided to go with O’Donnell over Castle. However, I think the answer is probably turnout.

Approximately 57,582 registered Republicans voted in Tuesday’s primary. An estimated 27,021 voted for Castle and 30,561 voted for O’Donnell; a vote difference of 3,540 (6% points).

Interestingly enough, Castle received far more actual votes in the 2008 general election for Representative than O’Donnell received for Senate that same year, suggesting that Delawareans voted for Castle and Biden (or Castle and not O’Donnell). This splitting of the ticket in 2008 raises questions about how turnout might affect the state’s mid-terms; especially across counties in the state. O’Donnell should expect that her win will move some Castle supporters to her Democratic opponent, New Castle County Executive Chris Coons.

According to the state of Delaware’s Elections Commissioner, the 2010 Republican primary produced a 32% turnout rate….Thus, the 2010 primary doubled Republican turnout.

Coons has been leading in the polls in all head to head match-ups against O’Donnell. And, in the general election, O’Donnell will have to convince independent voters, moderate Republicans, and Castle supporters that she will represent their interests. This will be an uphill battle given that she’s already indicated that she feels she can win without “them” referring to the Republican Party Organization, and suggesting the GOP might be too lazy to help her.

The September PPP poll showed O’Donnell having strong support only among self-described conservatives. Conservatives make up the largest portion of the Republican Party in DE, but they are heavily outnumbered in the state when moderate Republicans are combined with all Democrats regardless of ideology.

[O’Donnell] also has weak support among seniors, who heavily favored Castle.

Finally, regardless of the outcome Delaware will elect someone other than Joe Biden for the first time in almost four decades. That’s big

.

^ So if rightist voters in Delaware intended to — but presumably inadvertently — push the status quo even further to the left (by ending up with a US Senator that is as ultra liberal as Coons is), they followed the correct strategy.

I think we need to be clear-eyed about which type of nominee we have, and plan accordingly. Which means acknowledging the negatives, dealing with them in a straightforward fashion, and coming up with reasons that she should still be the voters’ choice.

I think it also means the candidate herself needs to address the doubts and negatives in a straightforward fashion and get in front of this. Canceling the talk show rounds doesn’t help show voters why their vote should go to her. It makes her look weak, afraid and doesn’t want to be confronted with perhaps truthful accusations. She needs to lead the way to fight back. Start watching Palin tapes and see how she learned to step up to the plate and handle the media. Running and hiding isn’t doing her or the R’s any good. She just looks nutty.

You have seen, here, people say that they will sit out elections rather than vote for a candidate of “their” party whom they do not like. Sometimes for what appear to be quite personal reasons, based on the unpleasant invective.

Why, I remember some people here telling me—just as an example—that McCain would not have done anything appreciably differently from Obama.

Um.

That is what is going on here. And I don’t have a good solution.

I’m with you: I thinking about SCOTUS appointments. I’m thinking of cloture. I’m thinking of Pelosi and Reid in charge, versus almost anyone else.

It’s all about Purity of Essence right now, and that pursuit will give us some awful, awful results.

Of course, does that mean that we should support squishy people? Not at all. That is what primaries are for.

But the stakes, as you have reiterated, are very high now. Higher than POE, so far as I am concerned.

Christine O’Donnell is smart to bypass these shows and the O’Donnell-hating media. All they’ll do is try to rip her with cherry-picked clips and the rest. They’ll use Rove, Krauthammer, Weekly Standard, National Review, Powerline, Castle, etc., quotes against her. She owes them nothing. Her goal is to get elected. Now that she’s raised nearly $2 million, she can tell the voters who she is and what she believes, rather than subjecting herself to the frenzy and bias of the media which clearly seek her personal destruction.

BTW, the trick to stripping paints or lacquers is to check them with acetone, alcohol, or just plain dish-soap and water first. So you know what you’re dealing with. In my case, the lacquer responded to acetone (but the acetone was slow) and came off instantly with a green stripper called Citistrip and lots of water.

Patterico – You are a jackass, moron, jerkoff, idiot with a keyboard, candy-ass RINO traitor, not even a conservative, and are actively working for the Democrats while taking payola from the Establishment.

And I notice you had a pledge drive the other day. So what’s the problem with the financials? Having trouble paying the bills?
Wouldn’t that be a shock under Obamenomics and Caleeforneeya.

Dave Searls says he wants a candidate who HADN’T repeatedly been subjected to legal action for failing to pay their bills, HADN’T gotten into trouble with the IRS for non-payment of taxes, DIDN’T engage in promiscuity and then start sermonizing about the virtues of chastity, after they’re through with their promiscuous phase (plus it looks a little odd if you’re preaching WHILE you’re living with a man you aren’t married to, which appears to be what O’Donnell is now doing), and HADN’T sued their employers for millions of dollars in a bogus sex discrimination suit.

Where are you going to get that person? Not in California. Not in Washington. Man you’d have to import her. From another planet probably.

O’Donnell’s situation is America. The next generation is being strip mined by politics as usual.

And I think it’s time some of the victims have a say on what happens next.

You started this party by calling O’Donnell a weasel. You got roasted by people commenting on the effects of your comments and those of your ilk. You were offended by the mis-characterizations of your arguments. You wanted to deal in facts. One of your facts is that Bill Maher has an October surprise, and that people that former campaign workers felt she was bossy, wanted to be a celebrity, spent money irresponsibly, and lied on her resume. Booga, booga!

You make fun of Palin’s call for unity and yet don’t understand why O’Donnell supporters have a problem with your posts.

I’ve not been sympathetic to your descriptions of how a true conservative would act. If there were something I learned about conservatives during the Bush years is that they didn’t have a problem calling each other out and attacking each other over their differences. Conservatives should deal in facts and factor out the emotion? Not likely.

On the one hand, I commend you on finding a hot button issue to drive traffic on your blog. On the other hand, this conservative in-fighting will seem a minor annoyance when O’Donnell wins her Senate seat and has to fight back the slanders and attacks from her colleagues on a national stage.

Why not look at the big picture and give up defending your nuanced position that somehow keeps getting mis-represented by others looking to demonize you. Join us in amazement as to the depths to which the opposition will exaggerate the importance of her history. Laugh and cry as we watch whether she can stand up to the pressures of a seven week campaign full of innuendo, mis-characterizations, and outright lies. Observe the tactics, watch the commentary, follow the money, laugh as the media gets their knickers knotted up when things don’t go their way, and resist the temptation to make news so as not to get caught in the cross-fire of an impassioned response.

“On the one hand, I commend you on finding a hot button issue to drive traffic on your blog.”

pk – How much advertising do you see here? Bill Jacobson’s insulting post that people were writing what they were to drive traffic was not a good way to end internecine feuding and your reference to traffic shows how little you know about this blog or its host.

You started this party by calling O’Donnell a weasel. You got roasted by people commenting on the effects of your comments and those of your ilk.

I want to know: exactly how many readers of patterico.com are Delaware voters who would have voted for O’Donnell, but will now stay home or vote for Coons — not on the basis of what they see elsewhere in the media, but based on what they see here?

One of your facts is that Bill Maher has an October surprise, and that people that former campaign workers felt she was bossy, wanted to be a celebrity, spent money irresponsibly, and lied on her resume. Booga, booga!

Please point me to where I posted about the former camapaign workers. You know this blog so well, a link should be easy.

You make fun of Palin’s call for unity and yet don’t understand why O’Donnell supporters have a problem with your posts.

I SUPPORT her call for unity. I make fun of how it’s being ignored by the O’Donnell supporters who are busy trashing those who weren’t thrilled with her.

Why not look at the big picture and give up defending your nuanced position that somehow keeps getting mis-represented by others looking to demonize you. Join us in amazement as to the depths to which the opposition will exaggerate the importance of her history. Laugh and cry as we watch whether she can stand up to the pressures of a seven week campaign full of innuendo, mis-characterizations, and outright lies. Observe the tactics, watch the commentary, follow the money, laugh as the media gets their knickers knotted up when things don’t go their way, and resist the temptation to make news so as not to get caught in the cross-fire of an impassioned response.

What news am I “making”? Your comment is so full of unsubstantiated crap, I wonder what your real motivation is here.

[UPDATE 9-19-10: Except that the “bearded Marxist” allegation, which appears valid from the link provided, does not withstand further scrutiny. Don’t take Weigel’s word for it, follow his link to the Politico article, which I refuse to link because of my boycott, and make up your own mind.]

Goddammit. Because I refuse to lie, now that I have found out this quote is bullshit, I have to say so — even though it will increase the piling on.

Patterico–nothing substantive to add to this, but just to let you the new server is much, much better than the the old one. On the old one, I would have been unable to completely load the comments page once it got somewhere over the 200 comment mark, or try five refreshes before it did. This one loaded this page, 400+ comments and all, in no time flat, with no need to refresh (and no need to refresh after posting comments either).

Christine O’Donnell vs. Al Franken
Scott Johnson at Powerline reminds us of a prominent Democrat who many thought did not have a chance of winning an election. Let’s do a compare and contrast of two candidates who had “issues.” For some reason in the opinion of the Ruling Class, Christine O’Donnell’s issues disqualify her while Al Franken’s issues … are not an issue.

• Franken is a man of the hard left
• O’Donnell is Right, but probably more closely reflects the views of a majority of Americans.
• Franken had a history of cocaine use
• O’Donnell is not accused of using illegal drugs
• Franken had failed to pay workers’ compensation insurance in New York where he had been making a living before he returned to Minnesota to run for office. He had also failed to file corporate tax returns in California.
• O’Donnell had a problem with her taxes and the issue was settled this year.
• Franken owed $70,000 in back taxes in 17 states. Franken blamed the problem on his accountant and then instructed his accountant not to talk to the press.
• O’Donnell did not have an accountant to blame and took personal responsibility.
• When the news broke, Franken hid from the press. One of Franken’s spokesmen explained Franken’s unavailability: “Al spent the week doing an economy tour of the state.”
• O’Donnell put all of her tax problems on her website including a transcript of her conversation with the IRS.

Scott adds

I should add that Norm Coleman was a formidable opponent. He was in my opinion an excellent Senator with the misfortune of having to run a reelection campaign in an extraordinarily difficult environment for Republicans.

If Al Franken was able to overcome his personal record to become a United States Senator, Christine O’Donnell certainly can. O’Donnell has the additional advantage of having a man who formerly advertised himself as the bearded Marxist for her opponent. His name is Chris Coons. Although he has shaved the beard, I am quite sure that his current views are kissing cousins to the ones he advertised in his college days.
This is a watershed year with the tide running strongly in favor of Conservatives. I know all about the biases of the MFM, what makes me angry is the attitude of people who claim to be on the Right but refuse to have anything to do with people not of their class. This is the time when those who were really nominal Conservatives will out themselves.

I am sure after hearing of this Obama and the democrats think better of Miss O’Donnell, after all, as Obama Propaganda Minister Gibbs Goebbels would say: “…she could not be so bad if she dabbled in serving our Master”

Voters won’t care. It falls under a general rubric of “dumb things people do in high school,” though it is admittedly a “specialized” activity. And in her case, it was a case of a young girl following a dumb guy into some dumb activity, which happens all the time at that age.

Though the activity is admittedly unique, it’s clear she’s moved way past that and appears to be pretty devout.

I don’t like this coverage she’s getting. It only makes her more interesting than Chris Coons and plays to her strengths and highlights how dull he is. As someone else alluded to, she’s lived life and had some screw-ups. She’s not an auto-maton So what?

People care about the economy.

If the media is trying to destroy her, they are failing dramatically and actually making her stronger — a la the Moose Hunter.